Category: "Debunking"

Kent Hovind guilty of tax fraud

Kent Hovind aka Dr Dino, young Earth creationist, and his wife Jo have been found guility of tax fraud.

He faces up to 288 years in prison and she faces up to 225 years.

In other creationist news I see the Daily Creationism has returned, with the same old stale arguments and outright lies. Come on let's get some fresh arguments please, copying and pasting my old replies is so boring!

The bible doesn't say the Earth floats in space

The Daily Creationism:

At a time when it was believed that the earth sat on a large animal or a giant the Bible spoke of the earth's free fload in space: "He... hangs the earth upon nothing" (Job 26:7). Science didn't discover that the earth hangs upon nothing until 1650.

Nice try, but very dishonest of you. Some fragments that survived the burning of the Great Library showed scientists knew the Earth was spherical, a chap called Eratosthenes worked that out and its size in the 3rd century BC (the bible speaks of it as if it is flat), hypothesised that the planets were other worlds and that they all travelled around the Sun in space and that other stars were suns far far away.

Oh wait, I get it now, you christians burn the Great Library down and destroyed over a million works, the collective knowledge of all of civilisation up until that point. Including a three volume History of the World, works on steam power, works on how everything is made up of tiny atoms and so on. Your contempt for knowledge is well known. Burn everything else and claim the bible is factual.

Let's quote that passage of the bible in full:

He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Stretched out the north over the empty place? Sorry buddy but the Earth isn't hollow, oh wait I forgot... The Earth is supposed to be flat isn't it?

The Book of Job and light

The Daily Creationism:

Sir Isaak Newton

The traditional spelling is Isaac, I don't know why you use a K? Trying to make him seem more evil?

studied light and discovered that white light is made of seven colors, which can be "parted" from white

Errr... Kinda, he discovered white light is made from a complete spectrum of coloured light.

and then recombined to make white again. Science discovered this in 1650.

Yeah you can have some real fun with prisms. And it wasn't 1650, it was later than that.

Now look at Job 38:24 (KJV) "By what way is the light parted, which scatereth the east wind upon the earth?"

Yeah that's nice. So what does the version of the bible I've got actually say (I'll quote the surrounding verses to in order to put it in the proper context):

22 Have you entered the treasuries of the snow, or have you seen the treasures of the hail,

23 which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?

24 By what way is the lightning distributed, or the east wind scattered on the earth?

25 Who has cut a channel for the flood water, or the path for the thunderstorm;

Hmm well it’s pretty clear to me they're not talking about the makeup of light, talking about lightning (yes those extra verses are also in the KVJ version), and some kinda storm coming out of the east.

If the bible is such a wonderful source of Truths (note the capital T) why doesn't it list the colours that made up the white light, the order of the colours and so on? Oh wait, I forgot the bible is largely fiction and you should stop picking tiny snippets out of it while ignoring huge chunks of it to try and prove whatever point you’re trying to make.

Evolution happening?

My old friend (he doesn't seem to use his name) from the Daily Creationism is back! He asks do we see evolution happening?

In brief, no. We see changes in living things, but none of them are heading in the right "direction".

Wow! He says it all in his first line. We see changes in living things. Thank you.

Oh wait "direction"? What direction? Evolution isn't some god thing where everything leads to this creature created in god's image, also known as man. Evolution has no direction. What survives lives, what dies, well dies. Natural selection doesn't ask if you're got a big brain or if you've got no brain yet can spin off a new generation inside of an afternoon.

The only direction of evolution is to surviving (and that's because species that don't survive don't pass on their genes). Generally speaking life on Earth at the moment seems to be surviving OK, so I guess that is a direction, the only direction I can think of, and we see that everywhere so what direction isn't evolution going in exactly?

Let me explain. We know that every living thing contains a set of instructions, like a blueprint or a recipe, that specifies weather it will be an alligator or a avocado tree, for instance. For a human, it specifies weather that person will have brown eyes or blue eyes, straight hair or curly hair, and so fourth. This information I written on a ling molecule called DNA.

Yup OK.

Evolution teaches that a simple creature like the one-celled ameba, has become a much more complicated one. Such as a horse. Even though simple one-celled creatures are extremely complex, they do not contain as much information as say a horse.

Yeah you're right one celled creatures generally don't contain as much information as a horse because well they're one cell. It doesn't have to worry about what other cells are suppose be doing or what shape they're supposed to be... So yeah... OK, what was your point?

Which christian state has Darwin on its banknotes?

Come on you crazy creationists... There is a christian state (that is; christianity is the official state religion) which has the satanic face of the evil founder of Darwinian fundamentalism (whatever that is) Charles Darwin printed on, name that country?

Give up? The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Behold a £10 Bank of England note:

£10 banknote

So why the fuck is that evil Darwinist, Charles Darwin doing on a banknote from a christian state? I hear you say?

Because he was one of the greatest scientific minds in human history, he did for biology what Albert Einstein did for physics.

So why don't you drop your god damn Darwin bashing? Even the former Pope dude said "evolution is more than a theory", they gave up trying to take on science because they got burned every time. Just like you guys get burned every time you try and take on science in the courtroom - where there are rules of evidence.

Evidence is something you don't have. In the land of science we point out where our hypothesis can be falsified so it can be tested. Darwin said if our understandings were correct we wouldn't find modern life with ancient extinct life. That is still true to this day, we've never found a human skeleton next to a dinosaur. Finding a human being in the same strata as ancient life. Just finding a fossilised human with a trilobite in his pocket, that would cause an earthquake in the scientific world and science would change to adopt the new data. And that's the key word here; change.

Both science and creationism go through stages of development to search for the truth (or Truth with a capital T if you're a creationist) to rip off Penn and Teller who did a great episode about creationism:

Science changes and adapts to what evidence is in front of it, its basic process goes through these stages:


While creationism is rigid and goes through the following stages:

Twisting fact.

Darwin is so evil he's on banknotes of a christian state - he must be one evil dude.

Mars as big as the Moon - wrong!

In August 2003, August 2005 and now apparently in August 2006 an e-mail has made the rounds claiming Mars will be as big as the Moon. What's worse is its basically the same e-mail with just the year changed.

It is false, even when it was the right year.

Mars was pretty close in August 2003 - even a bit closer than in 1971, however the difference is tiny over the average, the Hubble Space Telescope wouldn't even be able to tell the difference. After all it was still 35 million miles away!

This year its actually completely wrong, the e-mail couldn't be any wronger. Mars is about as far away as it can get, its on the other side of the Solar System behind the Sun!

Mars will never, ever appear as big as the Moon, ever, excluding any possible cataclysmic event in the solar system. Mars at its closest is only about 1/70th the diameter of the full Moon. To the naked eye it will appear a reddish star in the sky.

With a telescope it'll appear as a small red disc, with perhaps some white on either side (the poles) and maybe some dark features visible on its surface too.

Here's a picture of Mars (and Saturn) I took a couple of months back.

Saturn and Mars

Mars is the reddish blob near to the left of middle, closest to the horizon, to its left and above is a brighter star that's Saturn. The two stars seemingly mirroring them to the right are the two bright stars, Pollux and Castor in the constellation Gemini.

That's the extent of which Mars (and all the planets really) will ever really look like with the naked eye. Impressive and very bright but still looking like stars without a telescope or powerful binoculars.

For a larger version of this image and my other photographys check out my gallery.

So to say again, no Mars will not, nor ever look as big as the full Moon. Anything claiming Mars will be the size of the full Moon (from the Earth at least) is a hoax.

1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 ...7 ... 9 ...11 ...12 13