If you look at the universe and study the universe, what you find is that there is no evidence that we need anything other than the laws of physics and the other laws of science to explain everything we see. There's absolutely no evidence that we need any supernatural hand of god. -- Lawrence Krauss, World-Renowned Physicist
There is probably no other notion in any field of science that has been as extensively tested and as thoroughly corroborated as the evolutionary origin of living organisms. -- Encyclopedia Britannica
FAITH. No one word personifies the absolute worst and most wicked properties of religion better than that. Faith is mind-rot. It’s the poison that destroys critical thinking, undermines evidence, and leads people into lives dedicated to absurdity. It’s a parasite regarded as a virtue. -- PZ Myers
Religion is the antithesis of science, an anesthetic for the mind that disables critical thought and encourages the acceptance of inanity as fact, and wishful thinking as evidence. -- PZ Myers

Monday, July 25, 2011

I wrote a comment at a Christian extremist blog. They noticed the Norway murderer (a Christian fundamentalist) shares their idiotic fantasies.

"Evangelicals: Norway Slaughter Totally Opposes Goodness of God".

Is this the same magic god fairy who wiped out virtually the entire human race in the Noah's Ark myth?

The god of the Bible is a homicidal maniac, as is one of its followers, the murderer from Norway.

Norway, by the way, is an atheist country and that's why it's usually very peaceful there.


  1. "Norway’s strong Christian history has created a long history of peace within her borders and has been a significant contributor to Norway’s very positive impact on global peace efforts"

    hahahaha How did you manage to read that without dying laughing?

  2. There are a few reasons that Charles Darwin's evolution theory could not be accepted:

    a) How could human beings be evolved from apes as apes could not converse in human languages?

    b) How could human beings be evolved from apes as apes' languages do not sound alike as compared to human languages?

    c) How could human beings be evolved from apes as all the voices of apes sound alike and none could be the same as human beings?

    d) Some might argue that human beings speak in English languages nowadays differ from one country to another, such as, United Kingdom, Canadia, America, and Australia to prove that languages could be evolving. However, they fail to understand that the reason why English languages have been formed due to they tend to adopt words from foreign languages. Refer to the origin of English as spelt out in the website as follows: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_English_language

    This website gives us a clear information that English languages have been formed not because of the evolution of languages but due to they have direct influence from West Germanic.

    No matter how languages would have been transformed as a result of the influence of foreign countries, they are stil human languages and none of them would sound like apes.

    For instance, if human languages would be evolved from apes' languages, they would do the same to use apes' languages that would be from regions or countries. How could human languages be evolved from apes as none of human beings could speak the same sound as apes? Not only that,all the apes' languages sound alike and none of them sound like human languages.

    Let's give you an example. The word, computer, in English has been used in Spanish as, Computadora. In Portuguese, the word, English, has turned up to be computador. When the word, computer, in English has been used in Malay or Indonesian language, it would turn up to be Komputer. Don't we find the similarity among them in writing. They simply borrow words from other countries and modify to be their languages.

    Yet apes' languages are entirely different from human beings. None of human beings sound alike as apes, how could human beings be evolved from apes?

    No matter how apes' languages differ from one region to another or from one country to another, all the apes sound alike. No matter how human languages differ from one region to another or from one country to another, none of the human languages sound like apes and not even one of their spoken words, sound like apes. How could human beings be evolved from apes?

  3. e) All of the apes have black pupils and none of the apes have green or blue eyes' pupils. Only human beings have green or blue pupils. As none of the apes have green or blue pupils, how could human beings be evolved from apes?

    f) If human beings would have been evolved since past, why is it that there seem to be no change in human bodies in the past till now? As there has been no change in human body, how could there be evolution then? Your great grand grand….children will have the same physical bodies as you and there should not be any change in physical bodies even though our technology would have advanced to space.

    g) If human beings would be evolving from the time to time, why should there be genes to be inherited in the sense that a person would inherit infirmity , let’s says, cancer or diabetics, to children since their children should always be evolving or improving in health instead of simply inherited with genes?

  4. Mr. Tannery, your reasons for denying the evolutionary relationship between human apes and chimpanzee apes are unique, but a bit nutty. It's obvious your knowledge about how evolution works is not very good.

    I'm concerned your comments were intended to waste my time. All the questions you have. Why don't you look it up instead of expecting me to do your research. Most probably you don't care what the answers are anyway. You have a cowardly fear of evolution and you know nothing about it. Why should I waste my time explaining anything to a willfully ignorant person?