Alaskanspawn's Blog

Has it been that long?

2010-10-06T07:19:00.000-07:00

I guess it has been a while and I've been dormant too long. Stay tuned for more rants hehe.

A Christmas Prayer

2009-12-25T11:49:00.000-08:00

Our Pasta, who "Arghh" in heaven, Swallowed be thy shame. Thy Midgit come. Thy Sauce be yum, On top some grated Parmesan. Give us this day our garlic bread. And give us our cutlasses, As we swashbuckle, splice the main-brace and cuss. And lead us into temptation, But deliver us some Pizza. For thine are Meatballs, and ...the beer, and the strippers, for ever and ever. RAmen - Happy Holidays

http://www.venganza.org/

Is there a God? More propaganda

2009-10-08T09:50:00.000-07:00

This article comes from

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html?gclid=CKSjsNXxrZ0CFRPyDAodtDHtjQ

but it's not the first place I've seen these arguments and I thought I'd post it to show the errors. Look for my answers in bold text. Keep in mind that my knowledge of science is limited so where appropriate/needed I'll link evidence. The footnotes don't exist in this post, you'll have to go to the link above for that.

Is There a God?
Does God exist? Here are six straight-forward reasons to believe that God is really there.

By Marilyn Adamson

Just once wouldn't you love for someone to simply show you the evidence for God's existence? No arm-twisting. No statements of, "You just have to believe." Well, here is an attempt to candidly offer some of the reasons which suggest that God exists.

But first consider this. If a person opposes even the possibility of there being a God, then any evidence can be rationalized or explained away. It is like if someone refuses to believe that people have walked on the moon, then no amount of information is going to change their thinking. Photographs of astronauts walking on the moon, interviews with the astronauts, moon rocks...all the evidence would be worthless, because the person has already concluded that people cannot go to the moon. A better analogy would be refusing to believe in Santa. No one would deny his existence, right? Consider the good he does and the fact he even makes appearances in our Malls and homes every Christmas. Absurd.

When it comes to the possibility of God's existence, the Bible says that there are people who have seen sufficient evidence, but they have suppressed the truth about God.1 On the other hand, for those who want to know God if he is there, he says, "You will seek me and find me; when you seek me with all your heart, I will be found by you."2 Before you look at the facts surrounding God's existence, ask yourself, If God does exist, would I want to know him? That argument is subjective and all too similar to the Amway pitch "If you had an extra $100 dollars a month in your pocket, would you like that?". Here then, are some reasons to consider...

1. Does God exist? The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today.

Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few: I'm going to have to take these one at a time, even though the explanation or the negative of each goes without saying.

The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life. This explains nothing, only that we can exist in our current environment. Only the believers' arrogance can assert that we were meant to exist. I challenge any believer to suppose these conditions didn't exist, what then would life look like?

The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day. On second thought, I don't need to take these one at a time. These arguments are true but they explain nothing. If they were not then we would not exist, at least not in our current form. A better question, if humans did not exist, would God exist?

And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.4

Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:

It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees.

Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that thousands of chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.5

Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.

Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.

Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.

Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.6

The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.

The human brain processes more than a million messages a second.7 Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.

The eye...can distinguish among seven million colors. It has automatic focusing and handles an astounding 1.5 million messages -- simultaneously.8 Evolution focuses on mutations and changes from and within existing organisms. Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter. Ok, the evidence of evolution is all around us. We are not the final form, but are transitional. Our eyes are not perfect, neither are our brains, hence the belief in the supernatural. We are still evolving, give us another million years and I'll bet you we will look different...possibly unrecognizable.

2. Does God exist? The universe had a start - what caused it?

Scientists are convinced that our universe began with one enormous explosion of energy and light, which we now call the Big Bang. This was the singular start to everything that exists: the beginning of the universe, the start of space, and even the initial start of time itself.

Astrophysicist Robert Jastrow, a self-described agnostic, stated, "The seed of everything that has happened in the Universe was planted in that first instant; every star, every planet and every living creature in the Universe came into being as a result of events that were set in motion in the moment of the cosmic explosion...The Universe flashed into being, and we cannot find out what caused that to happen."9

Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in Physics, said at the moment of this explosion, "the universe was about a hundred thousands million degrees Centigrade...and the universe was filled with light."10

The universe has not always existed. It had a start...what caused that? Scientists have no explanation for the sudden explosion of light and matter. Theists have no explanation either, the difference is that science admits to not knowing AND we're ok with that. It is the foundation of science that the debate is NEVER over. Whenever you hear a scientist say they know something definitively it's propaganda, not science. Science can no more explain what created the source of the big bang than religion can explain the source of God. It's a non-argument...but then again, that's what religion is right?

3. Does God exist? The universe operates by uniform laws of nature. Why does it?

Much of life may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change -- on earth or in galaxies far from us.

How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable? Here's a good point/question. Order presumes a creator? I would actually be more likely to believe in a deity is the universe was disorderly. Some mischievous deity who likes to mess with the natural order of things would really be obvious.

"The greatest scientists have been struck by how strange this is. Bullshit. There is no logical necessity for a universe that obeys rules, let alone one that abides by the rules of mathematics. This astonishment springs from the recognition that the universe doesn't have to behave this way. Huh? Pure conjecture, there is no evidence to support a claim that the universe doesn't have to "behave" as it does. It is easy to imagine a universe in which conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, or even a universe in which things pop in and out of existence."11

Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said, "Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle."12 Do people suppose that a Salvador Dali universe is the natural state of things or that it could exist?

4. Does God exist? The DNA code informs, programs a cell's behavior.

All instruction, all teaching, all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billions of these letters in every human cell!! "All instruction, all teaching, all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose." This presupposes a creator and therefore cannot be used as proof. Evolution explains this as chance but I like logical inevitability as opposed to pure chance.

Well, just like you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.13

Why is this so amazing? One has to ask....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person's body should develop. Without it, replication would not exist? Or would life find another way to replicate?

Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it. Poppycock, the simple fact that it does exist is evidence enough that it happens as part of a natural process. Furthermore, it assumes that DNA is a code. Perhaps it is if you look at it from our perspective. Dive deeper to the molecular level and it's just a nucleic acid. It is not "read or interpreted" as code at this level. It just interacts as part of a natural process.

5. Does God exist? We know God exists because he pursues us. He is constantly initiating and seeking for us to come to him.

I was an atheist at one time. And like many atheists, the issue of people believing in God bothered me greatly. What is it about atheists that we would spend so much time, attention, and energy refuting something that we don't believe even exists?! What causes us to do that? When I was an atheist, I attributed my intentions as caring for those poor, delusional people...to help them realize their hope was completely ill-founded. To be honest, I also had another motive. As I challenged those who believed in God, I was deeply curious to see if they could convince me otherwise. Part of my quest was to become free from the question of God. If I could conclusively prove to believers that they were wrong, then the issue is off the table, and I would be free to go about my life.

I didn't realize that the reason the topic of God weighed so heavily on my mind, was because God was pressing the issue. I have come to find out that God wants to be known. He created us with the intention that we would know him. He has surrounded us with evidence of himself and he keeps the question of his existence squarely before us. It was as if I couldn't escape thinking about the possibility of God. In fact, the day I chose to acknowledge God's existence, my prayer began with, "Ok, you win..." It might be that the underlying reason atheists are bothered by people believing in God is because God is actively pursuing them.

I am not the only one who has experienced this. Malcolm Muggeridge, socialist and philosophical author, wrote, "I had a notion that somehow, besides questing, I was being pursued." C.S. Lewis said he remembered, "...night after night, feeling whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all of England."

Lewis went on to write a book titled, "Surprised by Joy" as a result of knowing God. I too had no expectations other than rightfully admitting God's existence. Yet over the following several months, I became amazed by his love for me.
6. Does God exist? Unlike any other revelation of God, Jesus Christ is the clearest, most specific picture of God revealing himself to us.

Why Jesus? Look throughout the major world religions and you'll find that Buddha, Muhammad, Confucius and Moses all identified themselves as teachers or prophets. None of them ever claimed to be equal to God. Surprisingly, Jesus did. That is what sets Jesus apart from all the others. He said God exists and you're looking at him. Though he talked about his Father in heaven, it was not from the position of separation, but of very close union, unique to all humankind. Jesus said that anyone who had seen Him had seen the Father, anyone who believed in him, believed in the Father.

He said, "I am the light of the world, he who follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."14 He claimed attributes belonging only to God: to be able to forgive people of their sin, free them from habits of sin, give people a more abundant life and give them eternal life in heaven. Unlike other teachers who focused people on their words, Jesus pointed people to himself. He did not say, "follow my words and you will find truth." He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father but through me."15

What proof did Jesus give for claiming to be divine? He did what people can't do. Jesus performed miracles. He healed people...blind, crippled, deaf, even raised a couple of people from the dead. He had power over objects...created food out of thin air, enough to feed crowds of several thousand people. He performed miracles over nature...walked on top of a lake, commanding a raging storm to stop for some friends. People everywhere followed Jesus, because he constantly met their needs, doing the miraculous. He said if you do not want to believe what I'm telling you, you should at least believe in me based on the miracles you're seeing.16

Jesus Christ showed God to be gentle, loving, aware of our self-centeredness and shortcomings, yet deeply wanting a relationship with us. Jesus revealed that although God views us as sinners, worthy of his punishment, his love for us ruled and God came up with a different plan. God himself took on the form of man and accepted the punishment for our sin on our behalf. Sounds ludicrous? Perhaps, but many loving fathers would gladly trade places with their child in a cancer ward if they could. The Bible says that the reason we would love God is because he first loved us.

Jesus died in our place so we could be forgiven. This is one argument that I have never understood. Supposing he existed, I never asked for him to die on my behalf, nor would I ever ask. In fact, it was selfish and I would have done everything to prevent it, would I have been there. Of all the religions known to humanity, only through Jesus will you see God reaching toward humanity, providing a way for us to have a relationship with him. Jesus proves a divine heart of love, meeting our needs, drawing us to himself. Because of Jesus' death and resurrection, he offers us a new life today. We can be forgiven, fully accepted by God and genuinely loved by God. He says, "I have loved you with an everlasting love, therefore I have continued my faithfulness to you."17 This is God, in action.

And the rest of this is just pure religious pandering so I removed it from this post, but if you're curious just follow the link at the top.

Anyway, all of this proof presupposes the existence of God and is not unbiased empirical evidence. Be smart, use your mind, use reason in place of superstition, understand that we can be "good and moral" without a deity. An atheist is not doomed, we are not unhappy and we are not immoral. We just don't have a need and find no evidence to believe in a deity. It's not reasonable or sane to believe in Santa past a certain age (cute as it may be), it is also not reasonable for a society to believe in God past a certain age (the age of reason). I've said it before, we are beyond this need. Religion is dead, God is dead.

Great Debate

2009-10-02T08:09:00.000-07:00

WTF???

2009-09-15T08:58:00.000-07:00

A debate...

2009-07-28T19:52:00.000-07:00

I started this on Facebook and thought I'd move it here to continue the discussion if it's warranted. The names of the participants have been reduced to initials and since this was just copied from Facebook, I apologize for the format. Also, since this is from Facebook, the conversation gets derailed a little but stays fairly on target. The following is what I asked:

"ok, let's stir the status quo...our so called national motto "in god we trust" needs to be changed to what it should have been "E Pluribus Unum"--thoughts?"

MIR
Ummmm.....can't decide how to respond. :)
Yesterday at 10:10pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
grrr, don't sit on the fence MIR :-)
Yesterday at 10:14pm · Delete

MIR
lol I'm not sitting the fence. I'm trying to decide HOW to reply....
Yesterday at 10:16pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
seriously tho, everyone assumed our national motto was e pluribus unum until the civil war when suddenly people's thoughts shifted to thinking the war was caused by our "heathenism"...as if the opposite of believing in god is heathenism
Yesterday at 10:18pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
e pluribus unum "out of many, one" is a saying i can get behind
Yesterday at 10:20pm · Delete

MIR
I don't think "in God we trust" is the nations motto....pretty sure it already is "e pluribus unum"
Yesterday at 10:21pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
The Congressional Record of 1956 reads: "At the present time the United States has no national motto. The committee deems it most appropriate that 'In God we trust' be so designated as U.S. national motto
Yesterday at 10:22pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
A law was passed by the 84th United States Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956. President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved a joint resolution declaring In God We Trust the national motto of the United States
Yesterday at 10:24pm · Delete

MIR
Hmmm....I feel a small debate coming on....not of disagreement but of just a diff perspective. Let's face it....civil war actions did resemble monsterous actions. Helping people get back to their faith (whatever it is/was) was maybe a way of putting things in perspective of their arrogance. In their trusting of their belief....it made everyone a bit humble again....
Yesterday at 10:25pm · Delete

MIR
Their God fearing ways that is.....made them more humble/less arrogant....
Yesterday at 10:25pm · Delete

MIR
Wow! West High did you a bit of good! :)
Yesterday at 10:28pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
in interesting thought but doesn't make a case for our national motto. to me, it was a devious, but ingenious, way of moving someone's personal agenda
Yesterday at 10:28pm · Delete

BA
'i dont like confrontations!' -TRex (toy story)
Yesterday at 10:30pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
debates brad, debates
Yesterday at 10:31pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
and i welcome all opinions/comments
Yesterday at 10:32pm · Delete

MIR
Whose??? Countries fold over religious debate. This nation came together over something positive for the majority in the 50's. Not to mention this country was founded on religious freedom....gives you the choice to believe in or not without fear. The "founding fathers" just chose to belive.
Yesterday at 10:35pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
to add to the debate, i think we should also remove "in god we trust" from our currency. we are not a nation "under god" nor are we all religious.
Yesterday at 10:37pm · Delete

MIR
lol Not debating....seriously. Just a slightly different perspective....I see where Tim is coming from. I however like the idea of "in God we trust" as it keeps the believers living a life of respect to their beliefs. Respectful living (well most religions)
Yesterday at 10:38pm · Delete

MIR
We ARE a nation under God....that was the whole idea of breaking away and forming a country of believers in God that could pick or choose their religion....the country was founded this way....non-believers have that right too. To not belive. But it is still " one nation under God" as that us how it was formed. Religious freedom!!!! :)
Yesterday at 10:42pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
actually not all of the founding father's believed, not all of them were religious and i think they took great pains to leave religion out of the constitution/declaration
Yesterday at 10:45pm · Delete

MIR
Hmmmm....I'm listening. How do you know this?
Yesterday at 10:47pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
"one nation uder god" was not added until the mid 50's. just because a certain decade of government decides to add some religion to our nation doesn't mean it was right. we should revisit this, i think it would be removed if we got the right lobbyists involved. afterall, it was lobbyists of sorts that got it there in the first place.
Yesterday at 10:49pm · Delete

MIR
But how do you believe they went thru "great pains" to keep it out? How do you know there were non believers then? That was a time of a God fearing life....
Yesterday at 10:53pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
well as you said, that was a time of god fearing people but you don't see that in the constitution or the declaration of independence. thomas paine, tho a deist, was decidedly anti-theist. i have to believe that the founding father's realized what it could mean to the nation if they allowed religion to rule.
Yesterday at 10:57pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
original pledge of allegiance: "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
Yesterday at 11:00pm · Delete

JD
Don't let him win Melanie!
Yesterday at 11:00pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
quiet you, unless you have something constructive to say :-)
Yesterday at 11:02pm · Delete

MIR
Ok....where did you learn the words to the Pledge of Allegience!?! lolMaybe you don't understand lol
Yesterday at 11:05pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
the internet does have all this info you know...look it up. i thought it was common knowledge that "under god" wasn't added until quite recently
Yesterday at 11:07pm · Delete

DR
I'm afraid if I agree with you I may wake up with a swarm of locusts on my house. So I am going to keep my thoughts to myself!!!
Yesterday at 11:08pm · Delete

MIR
So....who does it hurt having it as our nations "motto"??? What would we gain by changing it???More importantly.....how many more dollars of "Obamas money" is this going to cost??? :)
Yesterday at 11:08pm · Delete

JD
Oh.. now we see the violence inherent in the system!
Yesterday at 11:09pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
as far as who it hurts...no one, tho again that doesn't make a case to have it as the motto or on our currency because it doesn't hurt anyone not to have it either. as far as cost, nothing...just phase it out next time the currency is redone.
Yesterday at 11:10pm · Delete

MIR
Quite recently??? That was over 50 years ago....I am VERY selective about my information I retrieve from the www......as should you. And I'm older than you by one day...so as your "elder"....you should listen to me.... ;)
Yesterday at 11:12pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
as far as the pledge of allegiance goes, this was eisenhower's reasoning for adding "under god", "In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war." --transcendence of faith?
Yesterday at 11:12pm · Delete

DR
The machinery used to print our currency would have to be replaced at all of our federal reserve locations. And the money it would cost to change it would be highly inflated as its "government money"
Yesterday at 11:13pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
you should be selective and confirm what i say with as many sources as makes you comfortable.
Yesterday at 11:14pm · Delete

MIR
Nice Monty Python!Ummmm....that would do more damage that just monetarily I believe...and no, just the congressional debate will cost us money....it couldn't just be phased out. Not something like this.
Yesterday at 11:16pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
actually our government pays for our currency to be printed, which strikes me as odd and the machinery would not have to be replaced, just the "templates".
Yesterday at 11:16pm · Delete

MIR
lol that's not a retort!
Yesterday at 11:17pm · Delete

JD
Religous affiliations aside; our future landscape of our nation is no longer is UNDER GOD. We are made up of many religions and beliefs. The problem is that we sell ourselves as a nation of freedom and acceptance, but in our present "Modified" pledge, we basically alienate half our population.
Yesterday at 11:20pm · Delete

MIR
You have not directly answered my question on how you know not all the founding fathers we religious.
Yesterday at 11:21pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
interesting...about the motto on coins "The Supreme Court has upheld the motto because it has "lost through rote repetition any significant religious content". just take it off if it means nothing. that just goes without saying
Yesterday at 11:22pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
finally, joe. that was constructive.
Yesterday at 11:24pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
not only that but the current pledge is mostly repeated by our children, further indoctrinating them into religion without a whole lot of choice. these types of things should remain secular.
Yesterday at 11:25pm · Delete

JD
The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment states that congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Not to mention why would any religous body WANT to associate GOD with MONEY?
Yesterday at 11:33pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
jefferson, for instance, was pretty adamant about removing the supernatural aspects of religion and focus on the moral aspects. actually, you could say he believed in being good rather than a god.
Yesterday at 11:33pm · Delete

MIR
Interesting and valid point Joe. However, this country allows anyone to have and express praise to "whatever God" they believe in or not belive in. There are many names for peoples "creator" but the Pledge does not have to be stated by all. Nobody is excluded from it if they don't believe in it. That's like saying I'm excluded from Lent because I'm not Catholic. The entire Midwest changes thier menu during Lent. I choose to eat steak whenever I want because I do not believe doing that will make me go to "hell". But I'm certainly not "excluded" from anything I choose not to be a part of or believe in.
Yesterday at 11:33pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
religion, as a whole, is all about exclusion. the very fact that you won't go to heaven if you don't take jesus as your personal savior is exclusion by definition.
Yesterday at 11:36pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
so by adding a national motto to our currency and pledging allegiance to our nation under god, one could interpret this as exclusion.
Yesterday at 11:37pm · Delete

MIR
That is not a straight across the board belief. That's some religions. Catholics - the Virgin Mary. Many sectors have different beliefs. Again, it's not exclusion if you choose not to belive. It's exclusion if you choose a belief and are not allowed to be a part of it or persecuted for questioning it. Coming full circle to our countries beginning.
Yesterday at 11:40pm · Delete

JD
Xactly.. you have a choice to partake of the "Filet-o-Fish" or not on Fridays, but when it's emblazoned upon the money you use to purchase said steak... no choice there.
Yesterday at 11:41pm · Delete

MIR
Seriously now....My visa check card doesn't have religious beliefs printed on it. I never carry cash....
Yesterday at 11:43pm · Delete

JD
LOL... oh yeah. Problem solved!!!
Yesterday at 11:44pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
that's true, i never carry cash either hehe. it's the principle that this debate is about.
Yesterday at 11:44pm · Delete

MIR
My work here is done.;) lol!!!!Night guys....great fun!
Yesterday at 11:46pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
as far as exclusion, melanie, there have been many many cases here in the united states where children have been suspended from school for not reciting the pledge of allegiance due to a conflict with whatever religion they believe in or don't believe in. again this is exclusion.
Yesterday at 11:47pm · Delete

MIR
If that is true, then that is sad. However, that is an ignorant school official making a bad choice. Not a religious backed rule or law.
Yesterday at 11:51pm · Delete

Tim Anderson
that's kind of my point, religion makes people do stupid things. removing it from currency and the pledge is a good start to a secular nation.
21 hours ago · Delete

MIR
lol stupid people will do stupid things with or without religion, unfortunately.
16 hours ago · Delete

Tim Anderson
true but i'd rather have someone do something stupid out of stupidity's sake than in the name of religion.
15 hours ago · Delete

MG
Tim, I'm with you on this one. The 50's, when the change to the pledge and the national motto were made, was a decade of fear. These changes were reactionary - the building of a religious wall to block communism from entering the U.S. The founding fathers were against religion intermingling with Government. If you want to know more, read what they wrote. Many (not all) of them were privately religious men, but felt that it should be separate from their public duties. Jefferson is an excellent example - he wrote the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom prior to the Revolution. God is mentioned as both God and the Creator in the Declaration, but you won't find any mention or reference to God in the Constitution. And while yes, children have the choice to not say the pledge, not many six year olds know this or have the independent spirit to be the only first grader not standing when the teacher leads them in the pledge. Even high school students struggle with this.
11 hours ago · Delete

Tim Anderson
excellent and well stated MG...
11 hours ago · Delete

Holy Crap! part deux

2009-07-20T18:19:00.000-07:00

So it's been a while since I posted anything about religion. As it happens, something I read today sparked my interest in debunking religion again.

I've heard theists argue that because science can't explain the origin of everything then there must be a designer/creator. While many atheists would easily dismiss that as the root of what science is and that just because science doesn't have the all the answers doesn't mean there is a creator, I've never heard the opposite argument. The fact that religion does have all the answers should make it suspect. Any rational person that is presented with the answers to all life's questions should be wary. Any book that gives you all you need and condemns free thinking is dangerous. The saying "if it sounds too good to be true then it probably is" comes to mind.

During what I consider the "age of religion", think way way back to ancient egypt, there was certainly a lack of organized learning. Only the rich and powerful were educated and even then the quality of the education was limited to what they knew at the time. Religion was a perfect fit AND it was for everyone. This, in fact, was where things naturally took a turn for the worse. It is without question that those in power, be it moderate or extreme, want to stay in power. Those that have wealth wish to keep it. This has been and will always be the way it is, good or bad. Survival of the fittest can be applied here, it's just nature. Religion was the means to stay in power, to terrify the masses (uneducated, mind you) and collect money in the name of a creator/deity. It hasn't always been the God we think of today, there were many deities that came before the Christian God. All of them with similar traits, similar tasks, and similar rules. The obviousness of the truth is overwhelming...religion is a means to control and make money from the uneducated or easily persuaded through fear and retribution.

The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on nothing; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing and admits of no conclusion. - Thomas Paine

Palin steps down?!?

2009-07-04T07:05:00.000-07:00

Lots of reasons but the full truth is not known...at least that's my opinion. My opinion, she quit, she couldn't take the pressure of all the attacks, lawsuits, etc... Bottom line, no way can she hope to get the vote for president now in 2012, why would the American people vote for someone that might get bored with the office of President and quit?

Other than family, there is no good reason to quit with a year and a half to go in your term. You are not doing what's best for the people in AK...unless you feel you are not worth the office of governor. If that's the case, then you certainly aren't worth anything in politics either.

Meh...good luck AK!

Michael Jackson

2009-06-25T19:40:00.001-07:00

Forget the eccentricities, forget the allegations, forget the shell of a person he became...M.J. was the elvis of OUR time and one of the greatest entertainers of ALL time. He will be missed. - me

Socialism = Liberalism

2009-05-27T14:56:00.000-07:00

Fox News is as famous for being conservative and one sided as CNN is famous for being liberal and one sided. Glenn Beck is bent on convincing America that socialism is bad and it's being brought on by the liberal government. He talks about "what makes this country great" etc... but can we sustain this conservative idea of capitalism forever?

I'm going to use an odd analogy here so bear with me. I'm a Trekkie, like so many others I watch Star Trek in it's many different flavors whenever I can. The world of Star Trek could be considered a socialist world government (they've rid themselves of the need for the accumalation of wealth and generally all work for the betterment of mankind) and yet I've never heard anyone complain that this idea is absurd or bad. Granted it's a kind of utopian socialism that's all but out of reach for our generation or our children's generation but why is socialism constantly bombarded by those that cling so tightly to "what makes America great"? Should we not strive for this type of World? If you follow Star Trek, you know that humanity had to endure 100+ years of war to achieve this utopian socialist society...I'm hoping that we don't have to go that low to achieve some or all of this ideal life.

That aside, those that talk about the American way being lost are stuck in the past. In order to be great we cannot allow ourselves to be stagnant and wallow in the ideas of those long dead. Let's be the leaders we think we are and write our own future.

Personal saying

2009-04-12T20:15:00.000-07:00

"Life is a set of logical inevitabilities. It is not an uphill battle as some would have us believe. Evolution happens because it's easy." --- Me

So, I wrote that and mentioned it to one of my friends who quickly responded by asking who said that. I told him I did and was a little turned off by the question. Then I thought I could take it as a compliment but it got me thinking...did I really say it or did I subconsciously use something someone else said?

So, if you've heard it before let me know. A part or the whole quote, even if it's close, I'd like know.

A quick thought/question...

2008-09-30T14:49:00.000-07:00

I was thinking about "green" vehicle technologies, specifically hydrogen cars of the future. I found this quote...

"When hydrogen cars become the status quo, the U. S. can lessen its dependence upon foreign oil, achieve lower prices at the fuel pumps and cut down on the greenhouse gases that produce global warming."

It got me thinking about the "cut down on the greenhouse gases that produce global warming" part. I do believe it's well known that water vapor is one of the largest greenhouse gases today and it's also common knowledge that hydrogen fueled cars emit water vapor as exhaust.

/sarcasm on
So by exhausting water vapor, will we be warming up the planet even more?
/sarcasm off

There are some things in life...UPDATE

2008-09-26T07:42:00.000-07:00

So, thankfully, everything has turned out as well as it could have and everyone is breathing a large sigh of relief. I don't remember the last time I completely lost control of my emotions like I did with this scare.

My wife has dictated that we should never have to receive calls like that from my parents ever again :-). Way too hard to handle.

In my last post, I said I would tell you what to do in situations like this. To tell you the truth, I really focused on daily life, going to my Son's football games, going out with friends, riding my motorcycle, having dinner with my wife, etc... All of this helped put the problem in perspective and allowed me to see and accept all possible outcomes. As stated before, thankfully, it turned out as well as it could have and life goes on.

Stay positive, take things as they come and with a grain of salt.

There are some things in life...

2008-09-21T17:59:00.000-07:00

Some things that you can't escape, some things that happen despite living a good life, some things that happen regardless of race, religion, gender or age. One of these things happened to me (not me exactly but a family member) and I'm struggling to make sense of it, struggling to cope, and struggling to stay positive.

This is one of those things that make people find religion, not an option for me. So what do I turn to? What do I do when I can't fix the issue. I really don't know yet. In just 24 hours time, I've seen different responses to this, none are wrong but none help me. My wife asked the very poignant question today, "In times like this, how do you cope?". I knew what she meant, as I am atheist through and through.

As an atheist I have a different view of the world. To me the world is a logical set of inevitabilities. There are no reasons for things happening other than the fact that they do. Many look to outside influences (religion) to help explain why things happen. They look to these same outside influences to soften the blow and for the strength to move forward. I don't see it that way, in fact, quite the opposite.

I see religion as an excuse to stop thinking. I see it as debilitating and an offense to humanity today. No, I won't turn to religion. I'm not a terribly spiritual person either and so I won't turn to spirituality. What does that leave? Science? Sure, I've studied the problem and I do have a greater understanding of the why's, how's, and what's but that's not a soft squishy pillow to make me sleep better. So, what do I do?

I don't know yet...but I'll let you know when I do.

Holy Crap! Pardon my pun...

2008-07-13T21:49:00.000-07:00

So I was sitting here watching Seinfeld and didn't realize it had ended and Jack Van Impe Presents had started. I was about to post my rant on religion and started listening to Jack and his co-host. I am just flabbergasted at the amount to crap these people spew. It's actually distrubing to me to think that there are people out there that really listen and believe these types.

What disturbs me the most is that these people believe this crap so much that they would be willing to do evil things to make their point.

"Born of a virgin" says Jack, without doing a whole lot of research I do believe there were at least a handful of other deities at the time of Jesus that were not only more popular but also born of a virgin. Mut-em-ua, the virgin Queen of Egypt, supposedly gave birth to Pharaoh Amenkept III through a god holding a cross to her mouth.
Ra, the Egyptian sun god, was said to be born of a virgin. So was Perseus, Romulus, Mithras, Genghis Khan, Krishna, Horus, Melanippe, Auge and Antiope. If memory serves me right, Jesus, in one of the original texts was not born of a virgin but that wasn't sensational enough to procure followers. Paul, the earliest New Testament author, never mentions the virgin birth. For someone who we rely upon for much of Christian theology, it is an odd omission. Paul refers to Jesus’ birth twice (Rom 1:3; Gal 4:4) and never says he was born of a virgin or of different means than anyone else. You’d think that would be important. The virgin birth is also not in Mark, the earliest gospel, or in John, the only other gospel not based on Mark. Why is such an important story left out of all the early sources? Probably because it hadn’t been made up yet. The virgin birth was not put in until later.

So, now that we understand the virgin birth as a myth then what do you have to say about the rest of the story? I like this quote...Thomas Paine, American revolutionary and author, said “Is it more probable that nature should go out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie? We have never seen, in our time, nature go out of her course, but we have good reason to believe that millions of lies have been told in the same time; it is therefore at least millions to one, that the reporter of a miracle tells a lie.” Is it possible that the entire thing is a myth? Of course, there have been many examples, the most obvious being Greek and Roman mythology. I doubt we would find many today that still believe the Greek or Roman gods as anything but mythology, why should we think that Christianity is any different. The fact is it's not any different...it is mythology (albeit very popular mythology).

I find religion insulting and an damaging to modern human society. Religion had it's place when we didn't understand what the Sun was or why it went across the sky everyday, for example. It's time we move out of the dark ages. I am an atheist and have been as long as I can remember. I grew up in the Episcopal Church and was confirmed. I went to church every Sunday and Sunday school after services. I questioned everything and continue to do so.

There are many people in the world today that would commit atrocities in the name of whatever God they believe. They would be proud to announce it as a religious act. As far as I know, no one has ever committed an act of evil in the name of atheism...it wouldn't really make any sense since it's not a belief. Which then, would you rather have? Nut cases proclaiming their "evil" in the name of good or rational people with no need to believe in this crap?

Before I had even heard of Richard Dawkins, I had thought up the phrase "religion is the root of all evil". I thought to myself, how clever. Then my co-worker explained to me that Richard Dawkins had already made a documentary with the same name...oh well, at least I wasn't alone in that thought. Religion does do some good. It gives people a framework to live by who otherwise would not be able to come up with one themselves. There are some religious charities that do enormous good though I can't see why we couldn't do the same thing without the church.

I could go on and on and I will but now I should sleep...more to come...

The Great Smoking Debate

2008-07-13T21:31:00.000-07:00

Gonna make this quick...I'm pro smoking legislation and I have many reasons for that but rather than spelling them out here I'll point you to another blog that may have the definitive discussion on the subject. Ryan (arclightzero) at http://arclightzero.wordpress.com/ (Pro Patria) was kind enought to endulge me in a smoking debate. Read it in it's entirety here http://arclightzero.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/ryan-vs-the-anti-smoking-movement/

Now, Ryan, alaskancamel, WAstatesmoker, myself and others had quite the discussion on the recent rash of smoking bans. I have point out that Ryan's views are quite conservative but we won't fault him for that. Aside from a few of the posts, the debate was very well thought out and though it's quite long we all held our ground and refrained from the typical name calling and swearing that so plagues these types of debates.

Anyway, it's a good read. Read it and post any comments you have there or here.

ANWR...drilling is long overdue!

2008-07-10T19:45:00.000-07:00

Yet another topic ripe with controversy. It would seem that many people that are opposed to drilling don't really understand the whole story. An opponent to drilling might argue that we can't drill and save the wildlife at the same time...wrong. They might argue that it would destroy the pristine environment...huh? Drilling in ANWR would be restricted to just a tiny fraction of the total land in the refuge. Anywhere from .01%-8% would be open to oil exploration. Even if oil is discovered, less than 2000 acres of land would be affected. It's almost as if the majority of opponents to drilling in ANWR don't have a clue what ANWR is or just how big it really is. About 75% of Alaskans support drilling. This comes as no surprise to me considering how dependent Alaska is on oil revenue. Tourism and oil, that's it...well maybe a bit of fish thrown in with some other natural resources but oil is by far the largest revenue maker for the state of Alaska.

"We need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels"...no kidding, but this can't and won't happen overnight. We do, however, need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The more oil we find in the US the better off we are and the more responsible we can be at reducing the overall use of fossil fuels. Forcing the issue too hard and too fast can have serious consequences in the World economy...oh wait, that's happening already.

"Wind and solar power are the energy sources of the future"...ok great, I'm all for it but the cost and efficiency need to be improved before we can hope to make even a small dent in the energy needs of the US. The minute I can afford to run my house with solar power I will but unfortunately I'm not there yet. As a matter of fact, I actually don't think I know anyone that uses solar power.

"More oil means more burning of fossil fuels which means more green house gases"...dammit people, there is no absolute in climate modeling. Every model has so many variables and permutations, the slightest change or guess can have major effects on the end result. Read and comment on http://alaskanspawn.blogspot.com/2008/07/alright-now-for-something-completely.html if you have something to say about global warming.

I suppose I could go on and on about why we should drill in ANWR but a buddy of mine that runs http://www.anwr.org/ has far more information than me. If you are from Alaska and are against drilling (Shannon) feel free to post your rebuttal but remember that reducing our dependence on foreign oil and ultimately reducing our dependence on fossil fuels takes time and MUST BE DONE RESPONSIBLY! Do not make the mistake of using ANWR as a poster child for special interests or personal agendas. Remove yourself from the emotional response associated with drilling for oil and understand the larger picture.

Btw, I do have a healthy disgust for the irresponsible actions of big oil companies. Having lived through the Exxon Valdez fiasco and many other spills I really have no respect for them. Please do not think you can derail my argument by saying I am in some way benefitting from the oil companies. I am not.

Also, I am aware that Alaska alone cannot support the entire US oil needs. It does not need to. With North Dakota finding oil, apparently significant amounts, we can reduce our dependence on foreign oil...reduce. I do believe this is the necessary first step.

Alright, now for something completely different...well not really

2008-07-06T15:13:00.000-07:00

Climate change, global warming, whatever you want to call it is still a bunch of bull and I'm about sick and tired of hearing about it. Polar bears, ice caps, rising ocean levels, and the shut down of the global warm water currents are all supposed issues, again nothing but bull. So, there is no way that myself or anyone posting comments on this blog will ever be sure of the data but I think we can all agree that warming periods as well as cooling periods have happened before and will happen again.

In our recent history on this planet, we've been able to piece together some data about these periods of warming and cooling. Interestingly, it would seem that through all of these recent cooling and warming periods man...as well as the polar bears...have managed to survive, go figure. Does global warming occur, yes. Are we the cause, in my opinion (based on the data I've read), NO. Of course, should we be better stewards of our planet, sure...who would argue that? Should we all lose our minds and create an absolute panic about us destroying the planet, NO. This panic is creating an economy based on fear but that's another subject for another post.

For your reading pleasure... http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2007/10/03/nh-sea-ice-loss-its-the-wind-says-nasa/ or http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080626-arctic-volcano.html or http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/05/27/cold-irony-arctic-sea-ice-traps-climate-tour-icebreaker/

I'm not saying NASA is correct or National Geographic but it does make you think. Where did all the data come from, who interprets the data, and finally who twists it to make it fit their agenda? Is this current warming trend caused by us or is there a natural explanation? It's good to note that neither the NASA report nor the National Geographic report is willing to make the connection to global warming. This is both good and bad. It seems to me that neither are willing to go out on a limb to change the current status quo...that's bad. The good is they are sticking with just the science of what they find and don't seem to want to pollute it with political agendas.

So, for those of you worried about the sea ice in the Arctic or the polar bears, STOP. The bears will find a way to survive as they have done for thousands of years. The sea ice will regain it's former breadth as it has done since before we were around. To tell you the truth, after this last winter, I welcome a little warming trend.

Edit: I was just looking at our local weather this evening to see if I will be able to ride my motorcycle tomorrow and noticed a link to an editorial. This particular editorial/blog was written by our local news weather intern Joe Hansel. It deals with the question of global warming...http://kstp.com/article/stories/S499627.shtml?cat=3 There are many studies out there concerning global warming and if you use a little common sense it becomes very clear that we (humans) have a neglible effect on global climate.

Let's take care of this planet but let's be responsible about how we do it.

I'll be wearing this...

2008-07-03T10:48:00.002-07:00

Just ordered this T-shirt from psychoreindeer. For those that know me well, you'll understand why I like it so much and why it's so appropriate.

Quin and his favorite cousin Oliver

2008-07-01T20:03:00.000-07:00

Quin and Oliver got along great and by the end of the trip they were best buds.

Before and after fishing the Kenai

2008-07-01T18:55:00.001-07:00

It was quite chilly that morning but we had an incredible sunrise and lot's of anticipation as we prepared to jump in the drift boat.

No fish, except for the trout we had to release. No one was really catching anything that day and Kalo had the only real bite but lost it shortly after. Good memories and great pictures and I think Quin was excited to have the chance to fish in Alaska. Next time we'll find the right hole and pull in some big Kings!

Quin bringing in a trout

2008-07-01T18:25:00.000-07:00

Quin brought in 2 Rainbow trout on this trip, this was one of them.