Crazy Creationists: Dinosaurs Fled the Flood!

Last night I posted a piece about Mitt Romney' literal belief in his wacky religion. And, I noted that as an atheist, I find 'em all wacky, so I'm not so much singling Mormonism out, as I am saying it's just extra special goofy. But Mitt's not alone in his belief in unbelievable things.

Somehow, I got on the Creation Ministries International mailing list. And these folks are literal believers in the book of Genesis. Just FYI, that's the book that set me on the road to atheism, because it was taught to me at the same time as freshman Earth science. Guess which book won? Anyway, Genesis is chock full of ridiculous things that only the deeply deluded could believe are literal. From the "firmament" to the items set into it, from the cleanliness rules to the list of sacrificial requirements, from the conflicting dual creation stories to there being light before there was a light source? All of it is frankly unbelievable.


























But nothing is more ridiculous than the flood story. Forget that there are (again) two conflicting Noah's Ark stories, and different numbers of animals in each. There are problems with the size of the boat. There are problems with the technology of building such a boat. There's the problem of how every kind of animal got to the middle east, and then re-dispersed themselves back to from whence they came. There are the uncomfortable facts about feeding and housing these animals for such an extended period, and what they would do about the waste. How did they keep the animals from eating each other, or the humans? How did they transport the bacteria, viruses, insects, arachnids and amoeba? How did the sealife and freshwater animals survive in the stirred up, seawater/rainwater/sediment-filled water? How did plantlife and fungi survive submerged for 100 days? And we're not even talking about where the water came from, and where it went! Why would an "all-loving" god murder his "children," no matter how disobedient they were?

Creation Museum folly. Image from Bay-of-Fundie.com

On top of this is the question of dinosaurs. Why doesn't the Bible mention dinosaurs? Well, some try to parlay allusions of "dragons" and whatnot into dinosaurs, but it's a stretch. It actually makes the bible sound more like a bunch of fables to me. So, the question is, if man coexisted with dinosaurs, why do they get such scant coverage in the Bible? Why weren't they on the Ark? Did Noah take dinosaur eggs, rather than full-grown T-Rexes and Stegosauri? Why isn't it mentioned?

Obviously, it isn't mentioned, because the writer(s) of Genesis never heard of dinosaurs, and thus couldn't write about them. They didn't realize that the sun is the source of our light, so they could say it was created after light. They didn't know how clouds, the atmosphere, the orbits of the moon and planets, or stars in the universe worked, so they made crap up about the celestial bodies being placed in a bowl that separated the waters of heaven and earth. There are so many, countless, obvious problems with Genesis, an irreligious person like me just stands with my mouth agape. How can any adult take these fairy tales seriously?

And then I get my latest installment of further attempts at devising a narative that makes sense out of a book that really doesn't.  You know what I liken groups like Christian Ministries International to? I liken them to Rankin-Bass. You know, the studio that made such holiday classics as, Santa Claus is Comin' to Town, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer and The Year Without a Santa Claus. In those holiday specials, they took all of the implausibilities in the Santa Claus story, and explained them in such a way as to keep kids believing it just a little while longer. And as kids, we wanted to believe. That's all this foolishness is.

If you are interested (and I hope it's only for amusement value), you can find this group here: Christian Ministries International.

Are All Religions Equally Crazy?

"Excuse me, miss. I'm Adam. Have you seen a guy
named Steve anywhere?" Image from AlterNet

Good morning! Why aren't you in church? I'm kidding. outside of funerals and weddings, I haven't been to church since ninth grade. See, I had the good timing to be taking weekly confirmation classes at a Lutheran church during about exactly the same time when I was a) recognizing my sexuality and b) taking freshman earth science. The intersection of these three things combined to form a hell of a lot of internal dialog, as you might imagine. Mostly what it inspired was a whole bunch of "outside the box" thinking.

Long story short, I did not get "confirmed" into the Lutheran faith along with my friends, because I didn't believe what I was being taught. It quite simply struck me as absurd. And I wasn't going to play along to get along. "Faking it" seemed a worse "sin" than actual disbelief. And any worry about sin quickly faded after that.

The wacky things that threw me off the faith path were mostly in Genesis and Leviticus. There's stuff in there that even the most literal fundamentalist can't really believe. But most of us have heard the standard Christian (and by extension, Jewish) stuff for so long, even the loopiest stuff starts to seem normal, or at least we don't think about it much. But to an outsider, just how crazy do virgin births and 900-year-old people sound? Exactly.

[Excerpt]

Are All Religions Equally Crazy?

Does any religion make more sense than any other?



Atheists, by definition, don't think any religion has any reasonable likelihood of being true. And yet, for some weird reason, we're often asked to choose between them. Believers often accuse us of ignoring more moderate and progressive religions while we trash the low-hanging fruit of hard-line fundamentalism. . .

Read more at: AlterNet
 
Thanks to StupidMonkeyPlanet for the link

Welcome to This World

Wow. This video is deep (and the narrator is haunting). Before you click play, the video is of a mother instructing her child about religion. Depending upon your point of view, she's giving it to the kid straight or this is a cannily crafted anti-religious message.  I'm quite certain it is the latter that is intended, but really, could any argument be made by a religious person against what the narrator is saying?  Religion can be quite nasty when boiled down to its basic elements.  Well done.



Found at: Joe.My.God.

Genesis Explained Scientifically, At Last

A lot of people ask me, when I tell them that I'm agnostic, what led me down the road to that non-specific belief system. Or words to that effect. And the one thing I can point to is that I was taking Sunday School lessons to be "confirmed" in the Lutheran Church at precisely the same time that I was taking Freshman Earth Science. As it happens, my textbook made a whole lot more sense than Genesis. Presto, change-o, agnostic. Well, it wasn't that fast, but you get the idea.

Now, I'm not out to change anybody's religion. And by the way, it would be very nice if the religious folks would afford me the same respect, and stop knocking on my door. Oh, and trying to take my rights away based on their specific religious beliefs. But, I digress. . .

Here is a great video that makes the attempt to squeeze actual science into the Genesis story of creation, without being too snarky about it. Enjoy.

Lost in Translation

Image from Wikipedia

I've spoken of "Wiki-holes" in the past; the act of reading one Wikipedia listing after another until a ridiculous amount of time has passed without your knowledge. Countless other internet-"holes" exist, from IMDB-holes to (undoubtedly) porn-holes. Heh.

Well, I've just climbed out (for the moment) from an Amazon-hole. Nothing kinky, just reading some commentary accompanying Bill Maher's release of Religulous on video. There's a fervent batch of discussions brewing there between Bible literalists and agnostics/atheists. And I find the back-and-forth fascinating. The discussion that sapped my time this time was one between the "there are no contradictions in the Bible" faction, and the dissenters.

Now, whether or not there are (and IMHO, there are), the contradictions between Genesis and basic freshman Earth Science pretty much clinched it for me, all the way back when I was 14 years old. But many cling to the idea that the Bible is inerrant, despite the many authors, rejected gospels, and the translations and re-translations.

One point caught my eye, though, and I had to share it here on the blog. Here it is:

"Computer translation of The Spirit is Willing but the Flesh is Weak from English to Russian then back to English became The Whisky is Strong, but the Meat is Tainted."

Says something about translations, doesn't it?

Source: Amazon.com

UPDATE: I'd also like to point out something interesting (at least to me). I've participated and read message boards for as long as online communication has been available. The topics are many, but some of my favorites (outside of religion, and gay rights discussions) are fan sites. And in fan sites--whether the topic is The Terminator, Superman, Aliens, Seinfeld, Friday the 13th or any other work of fiction--there is the phenomenon of the "fan wank." A fan wank is an explanation by a fan that clears up problems in continuity. The fan makes an effort to explain away an uncomfortable diversion from established facts. They are rarely supported by "canonical" evidence.

This is exactly the same MO you find on religion boards. Contradiction in the Bible? Fan wank. Where did Able and Cain find wives that weren't their sisters? Fan wank. How was "light" created before the sun and moon and stars? Fan wank. In fact, Biblical apologists are likely the grandaddies of fan wankdom.

More on fan wanks: Here

Pope Gets Rid of Manger in Nativity

Photo from source, Telegraph.co.uk

Many religions baffle me, including the one I grew up with (and it's 57 varieties). I was raised as a protestant, though I never really knew what denomination. I think it may have been Methodist, or maybe Episcopalian. Then I settled on Lutheran before segueing into agnosticism.

The odd thing about my growth with--and outgrowing of--religion, was the more I learned about it, the less I believed it was true. One of my biggest issues had to do with contradictions within the text. One book of Genesis says the world was created in a certain order, and then another book lays out a largely different story.

It would seem that the New Testament has the same problem. Jesus was born in Bethlehem? No, Jesus was born in Nazareth! In a manger, or in carpentry shop next to a pub? So, all of you "the bible has no contradictions" people out there, reconcile this, wouldja? 'Cause the Pope is just sorta glossing over it. . .

[Excerpt]

Vatican nativity does away with the manger

For 25 years, the Christmas Nativity scene in front of St Peter's Basilica has shown the infant Jesus in a manger in Bethlehem.

This year, however, the Vatican has decided to radically change the scene, shifting it to Nazareth, and placing Jesus in his father's carpentry shop.

When Pope Benedict XVI inaugurates the life-size Nativity scene on Christmas eve, the sheep and hay will be gone. . .

Read more at: Telegraph.co.uk

Newsworthy Video: Genesis - Jesus He Knows Me

After posting the previous post, a few bars of an old song started playing in my head. Anybody remember an old Genesis tune called "Jesus He Knows Me"? It doesn't seem to pop up on classic rock or "Jack FM" type stations for some reason. But I think it's one of the band's best.

To top everything off, it even has a Larry Craig/Ted Haggard moment! So without further ado. . .