Creationists commandeer Cyclops
No, it's not a title of an X-Men comic, it was a headline in The Age. Okay, the Age's website, but I sound smarter when I say I read it in The Age. Except when I add a disclaimer saying I read it on their website. Shit.
A one-eyed, noseless kitten will be the centrepiece of a new museum intended to promote the theory of creationism.
John Adolfi plans to feature Cy's remains at The Lost World Museum when it opens later this year. The Phoenix, New York, museum will feature such oddities as giant plants and eggs, deformed animal remains and unique archaeological finds, he said.
Adolfi believes in creationism - a literal reading of the Bible's story of creation.
He wrote on the museum's web site that the theory of evolution states that "environmental pressures can lift species from the ape-like creature ... to us today. My question is this. Are there really positive mutations?
"All I can see are neutral or negative," said Adolfi, a real estate agent from Granby, New York.
Mmm. If anything proves that God created the beautiful universe with his divine knowledge and powers, it's this.
Where can I sign up. Truly this is the Lord's most beautiful creation. I know, I know, different strokes for different folks. It's all cool baby, believe what you want. But come on. First off, your last name sounds like an affectionate nickname for Hitler. Second, a creationist MUSEUM? That's like having a Lord Of The Rings laboratory.
And I dig the evidence. Evolution doesn't exist because a real estate agent from upstate New York thinks mutations are either 'neutral or negative'. Because real estate agents have been responsible for all the scientific breakthroughs in history. LJ Hooker discovered penicillin. And who needs Darwin or Dawkins when you've got Adolfi and his short-sighted pussy. If all mutations were negative, apes wouldn't have turned into humans and made the Sistine Chapel. If all mutations were negative, apes would be be a moaning, writhing mass of fur, substisting only on goo they lick with their fourth tounge, conveniently attached to their second vagina.
And they definitely wouldn't have evolved into me.
I rest my case.
23 comments:
two comments and you've already cut your losses. poor old tommy
thats to say dat evolution even exists. Youre not really scientific proof of evolution.
evolution is scientific fact
and i am scientific proof of evolution because nobody can insert 'vagina' and 'pussy' into a blog about evolution without a few million years of genetic refinement in them
You can't go around making crazy claims that the article does not mention. It isn't pro creationism and it is merely for a 'Lost World' display at a museum. This blog entry is as sensationalised as a Daily Telegraph headline.
Article: "creationism should be an option for people to consider." Yes, yes it should.
if it isn't pro-creationism, how come the Lost World museum is being opened by a group called, and i'm not making this up, 'Bibleland Studios'?
http://www.biblelandstudios.com/nuke/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=77
I'm sure creationism will just be an 'option to consider' at the Lost World museum, whose mission statement on their website (http://www.lostworldmuseum.com/?page_id=2) is to "present the greatest evidence ever assembled which validates the creation account found in the book of Genesis." Right now, they have a one eyed cat. And bits from Noah's ark. And.. 'out of place artifacts'.
The entire point of Cyclops is, and I'm quoting from their front page now, to 'As the Museum’s spoke’s animal, Cy will help people understand what evolution promotes and suggest Genesis is a better answer to the origins question.'. Again, I'm sure it's just an option to consider. They're certainly not distorting science to prove something completely unprovable.
So yeah, if it smells like, looks like and has a mission statement stating that it's a creationist museum, I don't think it's sensationalising to call it a creationist museum
It looks like you did an article using the wrong source then if you wanted to have another go at a concept you dislike due to its association with religion.
original article - guy buys one eyed cat for 'museum intended to promote the theory of creationism', guy thinks mutations are neutral or negative. everything i said was based on that, which was in the original article. i didn't need another source, because i didn't argue any points outside of that.
Tommy, I don't believe in creationism, but you can never disprove it. You know why? Because they have the ultimate argument.
You say, 'We now have proof that the universe is billions of years old, not thousands of years old as you claim it is'.
They say, 'But that's just the way God made it'.
If you want to be, then be secure in the knowledge that you are so much smarter than stupid old creationists, but don't be surprised if fifty years from now there's some other piece of evidence that's turned up and completely disproves this wacky 'evolution' nonsense.
Haha, of course, I'm only kidding, that will never happen.
Because the Rapture's coming in forty years.
I get the impression from you saying: "Second, a creationist MUSEUM? That's like having a Lord Of The Rings laboratory". Besides I am bored at the lack of controversy.
It is a matter of evolution is becoming an increasingly flawed theory, one of the most notable features being that 2/3 of all mutations are recessive.
So like any good science we look for alternatives, and like creationalism there are radicals (as mentioned). You can be critical of any theory all you want and say "different strokes for different folks" but not present both sides of an argument.
Like creationism, evolution also lives by the rules of "we have limited evidence and no real counter evidence". If you want to live by dated ideas and never give anything else a go (even if it is to be disproved afterwards) then I suggest you become the judge of an Indonesian court.
i really only did this blog to get past 5 comments again. i yearn for the good old days, when people would write fanatstic guest blogs that would gain hundreds of comments.
woe is me
i don't see the need to present both sides of the evolutionary debate in a blog where i make fun of an ugly cat and a guy's last name. i'm not writing a peer-reviewed blog. considering 80% of the ppl who read my blog believe in creationism of some kind, i'm pretty sure they have their own opinion on the matter.
in my opinion, a creationist museum is something to be laughed at, especially one that trumpets a one-eyed cat. it's attaching a scientific purpose to something completely unscientific. it's comedy at its most basic. that's not me sensationalising, that's what i truly believe.
and evolution is not an 'increasingly flawed' theory, nor is it a 'dated idea'. a 383 million year old 'fishapod' fossil was discovered that serves as the missing link between how life leapt from the ocean onto the land just a few weeks ago. and best of all, it wasn't an accidental find, scientists theorised that the animal existed (and WHERE it would be found) before the fossil was unearthed. it's almost like it's a workable, provable scientific theory or somethin'
damn it, my alter ego is always five minutes ahead
I want a kitten :(
i want that kitten
i am a kitten
On the whole evolution vs. creationism.
People who don’t accept evolution because there is not enough evidence, is fine. However people who disagree with evolution because it is contrary to what they believe is just downright hypocrisy.
How can you say that something that can never really be proven or disproven is so dissimilar to creationism. And yes if by chance evolution was true it would contradict the bible, Scriptures say “each animal brings forth after its own kind”
Such a contradiction would ruin all credibility of bible so trying to disprove it is only natural if you are a creationist.
And yes I’m sure its easy enough to google evidence against evolution as easy as it is to for me to google evidence for, but the point of the matter is if you disagree purely cause it doesn’t suit you, you are only cheating yourself.
i like kittens cos their fluffy
Not exactly sure if anything xmaxx said made any sense, so I will stop trying to work it out.
Show me somewhere in the bible that says evolution can't/won't happen. The concept of evolution does not disprove there is a creational being out there nor does it contradict anything that the bible says.
The main difference of the two theories is that there are some biological structures that are far beyond the limits of natural evolution, such as the human eye. Hence they are so intricate it is almost as though they were designed for that sepcific purpose by a maker, this idea is not new and is taught in biology classes alongside evolution.
I can see that finding a fossil 383 million years old is a great find, yet genetic variation within a species compared to the evolution of an entirely new species from another is still very theoretical. Why is it that you don't question the legitimacy of these claims?
because deconstructing the intricities of evolutionary theory on a blog designed so i can bag out stuff for fun isn't exactly my idea of a good time. there are plenty of gaps in the theory of evolution, but creationism is not a logical, scientific alternative to be held in the same reverence because it's not, it's a story.
and evolution can be consistent with the bible depending on how it's read. you can ignore the bit about birds being created before reptiles, and indeed say that all of genesis is just an allegory, but i don't get how the little bit about there being no death before Adam sinned can be explained away like everything else. how can there be natural selection without death?
"there are plenty of gaps in the theory of evolution"
My work here is done *flys away*
and with 20 comments so is mine :D
tommy you may be interested in a painted tribute to the one eye
http://7deadlysinners.typepad.com/sinners/2006/01/memento_mori.html
[url=http://kaufenviagragenerika50mg.net/]viagra[/url] viagra 50mg [url=http://achat-viagra-pascher.net/]viagra[/url] tadalafil [url=http://comprarviagragenerico100mg.net/]viagra generico[/url] precio viagra 50 mg [url=http://comprareviagragenerico50mg.net/]prezzo viagra[/url] viagra costo
Post a Comment