Never seriously doubted the modern evolutionary synthesis? You should try it sometime.
[Hat tip: Reed]
Category Archives: Atheism
Does Mummy exist?
The False Deity Called Evolution.
Kiwi Hottie/ Model Rachel Whitwell.
“When I look at a beautiful Woman I know there is a God!”
Tim Wikiriwhi
Browsing the NZ Herald yesterday today I noticed an article which claims clinical studies have shown that an infant human beings cry is at such a pitch as to provoke an unusually fast response in Adults.
I found a link to this topic here:
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/babys-cry-triggers-fast-response-20120111-1ptxq.html
Now I want to use this story to point out a very important observation regarding the interpretation of evidence.
Firstly as a bare observable fact, this mechanism for provoking a ‘Fast response’ is quite extraordinary.
The real dilemma for us is when we attempt to conceptualize how such a relationship could come into being.
At face value this ‘relationship’ appears to have a reasoning underpinning it… It looks like a designed order. Thus by looking at such things , to conclude there must be a Wise God, is perfectly rational.
This is what Richard Dawkins means when he confessed… “biology is the study of complicated things that appear to have been designed for a purpose.”
The Blind Watchmaker, 1996, p. 1.
Yet despite this apparent conclusion the article goes on to say…
“Evolution has decided that it is a good thing for us to look after our young, and there is something in the acoustic properties of babies’ cries that evokes a very basic response that appears to be hardwired in ancient parts of our brains,” said Prof Kringelbach.
Do you notice what happened here.? Out of thin air Prof Kringelbach invokes the strong voodoo spirit the atheists call Evolution! “Evolution Decided”. They accredit This dead and blind watchmaker with benevolence… blessing us with all good things.
It is amazing to read the Divine powers Materialist atheists atribute to their mystic power they call ‘Evolution’.
Books on Evolution written to indoctrinate the sheeple have weird titles like ‘The Miracle of life’!!!???
Atheists want you to abandon your inclinations towards concluding that such amazing relationships as exist between Parents and children are Artworks of a purposeful/ meaningful/ All powerful designer… by accepting their 100% fabricated myth which is contrary to what the facts suggest to the rational and open minded thinker!
The Atheists are trying to Smoke you!
They claim Science is on their side. Indeed they swear Science is their God, yet Like wolves in Sheep’s clothing… They love to pontificate wearing white overcoats (The Religious garb of the Atheist priesthood) …to make fools think they are Holy / absolutely objective / absolute masters of scientific truth… when in fact they are so lost in myth and superstition that they may as well have bones through their noses… The white overcoat has become pseudo religious garb of the atheist priesthood.
And the theory of Evolution is one of the greatest delusions ever believed.
I would like to point out that this article would show far greater scientific integrity if they had simply published the results of their studies… and not put in their biased/unscientific opinion/ explanation of Evolution.
It would read something like this. “ Studies have shown that a Babys cry provokes an unusually swift response from adults” .*FULL STOP*
That’s where the Science in this article finishes!
The spiel on evolution that followed afterwards was an add on Bullshit opinion… a personal faith position of the writer…not science at all!
Design is an observable principle in reality. I am typing this post via many products of Design… Not merely the Keyboard and Hard drive, but my very hands, Eyes, and mind.
This goes to prove my argument I have that The entire theory of evolution could be removed, indeed completely thrown out… without harming any real scientific knowledge!
It is an example of how the perverse theory of evolution is unnecessarily thrown over all data, not because of the conclusions drawn from observation… but to thwart the most obvious rationale that is derived from contemplating the ramifications of the data.
The theory of Evolution is a Giant smoke screen, hiding the most stark of truths!
*There is a God* indeed “ The Fool hath said in his heart there is no God” Psalm 14vs1.
Beauty transcends Language!
The Green Manalishi.
Ever been attacked by an Evil Entity? I have. When I was 17 years old, living in a shed in the middle of Winter I experienced an Entity Attack.
I awoke in the middle of the night to to a feeling of dread. Paralyzed by the terror of an overwhelming Evil presence…I could not even cry out for help. Next It felt like the Being was trying to Possess me by putting its arms inside my arms and its legs inside my legs…putting me on like a suit… then it vanished. I was not a Christian at the time yet the experience bothered me deeply. I didnt talk about it that much. Some people say they had herd that it was a ‘sleep dysfunction’… ie ‘Rational folk’ write off all supernatural experiences as a form of ‘psychosis’.
As a Materialist myself at the time, I most likely chose to accept this non-supernatural interpretation of the event, and quickly forgot about it until Last night Sky TV did a show on the subject. ‘It’ has a name… The Entity Attack Phenomena. And On that show they estimated as many as 30% of all people have experienced it.
Now This interests me because this is a typical example of a real phenomena…possibly a legitimate spiritual experience which is automatically disclaimed by the materialist community as delusional because to admit they are real spiritual events explodes their Materialism to pieces.
Another interesting topic which correlates to this is the Near Death Experience. It has also been experienced by hundreds of people, yet again is written off as delusional by Materialists.
I became a Christian about a year after this experience, I don’t remember it being a factor in my conversion, yet today I do take comfort in the Christian truth that Christ is greater than any demonic Spirit. I still Battle devils in my sleep… as a soldier for Christ.
I am bloging this both to put this freaky experience into the Debating Arena, and fishing for any comments from others whom may have experienced this ‘Entity Attack’, or had a Near Death Experience, or some other Trippy Shit happen to them?
I have a relative whom it was said that he had a ‘Makatu’ hex put on him
Now He is an atheist and struggles to explain what He experienced. He does not talk about it. I asked him… “Do you believe in ghosts? He said ” No!…But Ive seen one…”
He had to get a moari spiritualist to remove it… yet he still maintains his atheism because Spiritualism scares him too much… He must rationalise away his experience via Naturalist sophistry.
Here is a link to an article on this ‘Entity Attack Phenomena”
http://www.mysteriaparanormalevents.co.uk/The-Entity-Attack-Phenomena.html
Here is another one on Incubus and Succubus:
http://www.hellhorror.com/demons/demonology/228/Incubus.html
Update: 23-7-12.
It appears This Satanic Being is murderous!
I just caught the end of a weird TV show ‘A Thousand ways to die’.
I told story about a Hot Chick who suffered regular ‘Nightmares’ in which she would be attacked/ strangled by a An Evil Dwarf-ish being. It Killed her! She died in her Sleep… from a heart attack.
The show said she was just one of hundreds of reported cases of of SUNDS… Sudden unexpected nocturnal death syndrome
Disclaimer: I am not an anti-science Mystic. I am anti-pseudo science. I call for higher standards and greater scientific rigor.
As a Christian, I still endorse the Laws of Physics, and look for natural mechanisms and explanations for phenomena yet also believe not everything in existence, and experience is explainable via materialistic causes and effects… *that is the primary assumption of the atheist Materialist*, which blinds their minds and makes then incapable of conceiving anything is evidence of the supernatural.
They are trapped in their own circular thinking. A prison of their own device.
This is the mindset that writes off everything as delusional which does not fit well with their Godless conception of reality.
Tim Wikiriwhi.
If God is dead, nothing is permitted
[Cross-posted to SOLO.]
Objectivism is a religion!
Atheism is not a religion. The term ‘religion’ can properly be applied only to belief systems which include a belief in a god or gods. The term ‘religion’ can properly be applied only to belief systems which include a belief in the supernatural.
Objectivism is explicitly atheistic … but wait! Implicitly, Objectivists believe in a supernatural realm! It’s a cornerstone of the Objectivist philosophy! Surprise, surprise! Objectivism is not, after all, a naturalistic worldview.
Rand wrote an essay called The Metaphysical Versus the Man-Made. In it, she says
Any natural phenomenon, i.e., any event which occurs without human participation, is the metaphysically given, and could not have occurred differently or failed to occur; any phenomenon involving human action is the man-made, and could have been different.
In other words, phenomena involving human action are not natural phenomena. They’re supernatural phenomena! Why? Because Man is a supernatural being! Why is Man a supernatural being? Because He has a supernatural power! And what is Man’s supernatural power? It is the ability to exercise something called libertarian free will.
Unfortunately, Objectivists are at a complete loss to explain how this works, to explain how it is even possible, or to explain how the notion of free will even makes sense according to the atheistic, materialistic worldview to which they profess to subscribe. Nonetheless, Objectivists are adamant that Man possesses free will.
Libertarian free will is a supernatural capacity. One who exercises it is a supernatural being.
Objectivism is a religion, but Objectivists worship Man, not God.
[Cross-posted to SOLO.]
Atheism in the public square
In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, John Adams wrote
Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been on the point of breaking out, “This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!!!”
Positive Atheism tells us
This was not his reasoned opinion. Although John Adams often felt an urge to advocate atheism as a popular world view (because of the sheer abuses perpetrated by religious charlatans), he was of the firm and reasoned opinion (basically undisputed in his day) that religion is essential to the goal of keeping the masses in line.
Clearly, as Adams used the term, ‘atheism’ means “no religion”.
Jefferson famously said that
religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God
What of those who have no God? They have no religion. Jefferson also said
Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person’s life, freedom of religion affects every individual.
Atheism is the belief that there is no God. It implies non-belief that there is a God. Atheism, as understood by Jefferson, is not a religious belief.
John Lennon wrote a song in which he famously asks us to
Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people living for todayImagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace
By religion, Lennon means belief systems which include beliefs in the supernatural—God, Heaven, Hell, etc. His view is that we’d be better off in a world in which there was no God, i.e., one in which atheism was true. In such a world there would be “no religion” and “all the people living life in peace.”
Atheism, as understood by Lennon, is not a religion.
Once every 5 years, New Zealand citizens are required to participate in a census. One of the questions seeks to elicit the respondent’s “religious affiliation”. According to Wikipedia,
In the 2006 Census, 55.6 percent of the population identified themselves as Christians, while another 34.7 percent indicated that they had no religion
That’s right, there is a box to tick labeled ‘No religion’. There are no boxes to tick labeled ‘Atheist’ or ‘Humanist’ or ‘Objectivist’. There’s not even a box labeled ‘Jedi’.
Atheism, as understood by Statistics New Zealand, is not a religion.
Wikipedia’s has an entry titled Irreligion in New Zealand.
Irreligion —the absence of religious belief or affiliation— is an increasing trend in New Zealand. Although New Zealand has no established religion, Christianity has been the majority religious affiliation since European settlement in the 19th century. The trend toward irreligion may indicate increasing secularisation as well as a rise in non-institutional spiritual belief.
Atheism, as understood by (some) Wikipedia authors, is not a religion. It’s an irreligion!
The meaning (or meanings) of a word is determined by the conventions governing its use. What those conventions are is determined by the facts of usage. (See examples above.)
It is not conventional to call atheism a religion.
It is conventional to rebuke those who do. 😉
Lies, damned lies, and ‘religion’
To lie is to bear false witness. It is to make an untruthful statement intended to deceive.
Jesus says, “Do not bear false witness.” (KJV) Lying is wrong. But why? Jesus explains,
Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! (NIV)
Centuries later, the philosopher Immanuel Kant came up with a secular account of why it is wrong to lie which, it seems, Jesus had prefigured. In his essay On a Supposed Right to Lie from Philanthropy, Kant went so far as to claim that it would be wrong to lie to a would-be murderer even to save an innocent life.
Truthfulness in statements that one cannot avoid is a human being’s duty to everyone, however great the disadvantage to him or to another that may result from it… [I]f I falsify… I… do wrong in the most essential part of duty in general by such falsification… that is, I bring it about, as far as I can, that statements (declarations) in general are not believed, and so too that all rights which are based on contracts come to nothing and lose their force; and this is a wrong inflicted upon humanity generally… For [a lie] always harms another, even if not another individual, nevertheless humanity generally, inasmuch as it makes the source of right unusable.
Kant based his moral philosophy on a maxim he called the Categorical Imperative.
Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.
You cannot will that the maxim, “Bear false witness,” become a universal law! If we all lied, all the time, then soon no one would believe a word that anyone said. After a while, no one would even hear what anyone said.
Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say.
Talk would be ignored, like a background noise tuned out. Ultimately, we’d be struck dumb. No one would bother to say anything at all, even the truth, since no one would believe him.
Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!
To lie is not merely to commit a crime against he to whom the lie is told. It is to commit a crime against language itself. St. Augustine said
But every liar says the opposite of what he thinks in his heart, with purpose to deceive. Now it is evident that speech was given to man, not that men might therewith deceive one another, but that one man might make known his thoughts to another. To use speech, then, for the purpose of deception, and not for its appointed end, is a sin. Nor are we to suppose that there is any lie that is not a sin, because it is sometimes possible, by telling a lie, to do service to another.
Which brings me to my final point. Lying is an abuse of language. But it’s not the only one. The Biblical injunction, “Thou shalt not bear false witness,” has its corollary in M. Hare’s maxim, “Say what you mean, and mean what you say.” Words have meanings. To say what you mean, you must find the words that mean what you mean to say, and say them. Mean what you say, and say what you mean. Surreptitious redefinition is a species of pernicious redefinition. It, too, is an abuse of language.
Words and phrases have meanings. For example, Christianity is a belief system, a worldview, a way of life, an institution … and a religion. Secular humanism is a belief system, a worldview, a way of life, an institution … but not a religion. The word ‘religion’ is used to distinguish between creeds whose central doctrines include the reality of a god or gods, and those whose central doctrines do not, or which are explicitly atheistic.
Lie and, ultimately, language ceases to function. Use the term ‘religion’ to encompass secular creeds, customs and ideologies and, ultimately, ‘religion’ ceases to function. Pernicious redefinition is tantamount to lying. Dare I say it’s also akin to theft?! I used to be a “liberal”, until today’s liberals took the term ‘liberal’ unto themselves. Now I’m a libertarian. But for how much longer? How much time do I have before I morph into a traitorous idiot?
Ayn Rand was a libertarian and atheism is not a religion.
Is Objectivism a religion?
According to Wikipedia, a religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.
Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that establishes symbols that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values. Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe. They tend to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle from their ideas about the cosmos and human nature.
Objectivism is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that establishes symbols that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values. Objectivism has narratives (The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged), symbols (the dollar sign, the New York skyline), traditions (psycho-epistemology, Concepts in a Hat) and sacred histories (the blemish-free life of Ayn Rand) that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe. Objectivists try to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle (smoking cigarettes, listening to Rachmaninoff) from Rand’s ideas about the cosmos (“the Metaphysical”) and human nature (“the Man-Made”).
Is Objectivism a religion? According to (some) Wikipedia authors, the answer is yes.
But wait!
Surely, that can’t be right. Recently, thousands of copies of the DVD of Atlas Shrugged were recalled because the cover inadvertently described the story as one of “courage and self-sacrifice”. Shouldn’t Wikipedia’s definition of religion likewise be recalled? After all, Objectivists are implacably opposed to religion, or “mysticism,” as they like to call it.
Wikipedia’s definition of religion is too broad. Loosely speaking, yes, Objectivism is a religion. But loose talk can cost lives. Wikipedia’s definition omits mention of belief in a supernatural entity or entities, worthy of worship. Belief in a god or gods is not incidental to religion. It is essential to it. But Objectivism is atheistic. So, properly speaking, no, Objectivism is not a religion. Objectivism is a philosophical system, a worldview, a way of life, an institution … but not a religion.
Properly speaking, Objectivism is not a religion … the term ‘religion’ can properly be applied only to belief systems which include a belief in a god or gods.
God’s unwitting minion?
Of the Four Horsemen of the New Atheist Apocalypse, I rate Christopher Hitchens highly. (Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, not so much.)
One of Hitchens’s last public appearances was at the Texas Freethought Convention where he was presented with the Freethinker of the Year Award by Richard Dawkins.
When I watched this, I was struck by a few things Christopher Hitchens had to say.
If Jesus wasn’t the son of God, he was a hideous, wicked imposter whose words were vain and empty and intended to deceive.
Isn’t that the main premise in C. S. Lewis’s well known argument (Lewis’s Trilemma) for the divinity of Jesus?
In conversation with a young freethinker whose copy of his book Hitchens autographs, he pays respect to Jesus and reminds his young fan to heed Christianity’s central message.
This is getting worse and worse. She’s floored me twice now. This is like the rabbis confronting Jesus outside the temple, you know …
Lots of love, take it easy. Remember the love bit, also.
RIP Christopher Hitchens.