Friday, June 30, 2006
An unexpurgated and unmitigated Horse's Ass named Jon Carroll writes for the Moon Bat Chronicles, otherwise known as the San Francisco Chronicle. Carroll claims Bush's criticism of the New York Times is really a secret appeal to the anti-semitic bigotry of Bush's base, since "New York" is actually a code word for "Jews."
The name of the New York Times contains the word "New York." Many members of the president's base consider "New York" to be a nifty code word for "Jewish." It is very nice for the president to be able to campaign against the Jews without (a) actually saying the word "Jew" and (b) without irritating the Israelis. A number of prominent Zionist groups think the New York Times is insufficiently anti-Palestinian, so they think the New York Times isn't Jewish enough.
Jon Carroll is the worst kind of unethical Leftist here in the Bay Area and we generally reserve for him only our deepest contempt. For instance, Moon Bat City (San Francisco) regularly hosts anti-Jewish extravaganzas at San Francisco State University and other locations in Lunatic City. There is nothing more anti-semitic and pro-terrorist than a San Francisco Leftist journalist. Calling "New York" a code name for "Jew" seems especially absurd, even for Jon Carroll. What about the all the Chinese, the Irish and the Puerto Ricans who have long been residents of New York? Obviously Jon Carroll is an unethical and egregious liar who slanders conservatives without a second thought as to the accuracy of his charges.
But then I thought about it, and you know, Carroll may be right about the name of a big city being a "code word" for an epithet of some sort. For example, I have known for a while now that "San Francisco" is a code word for ASSHOLES. Which may explain its status as Gay Capitol of the World.
The good news is that the Moon Bat Chronicles is bleeding red ink like a terrorist sympathizer caught in the path of a Caterpillar bulldozer. With any luck Jon Carroll will be beating the pavement soon looking for a real job. It won't be easy since his entire work experience consists of being a flaming prick. Outside of journalism, there isn't much call for those kinds of skills.
The NY Times points cranks, radicals, al-Qaeda operatives and would be assassins to the summer homes of Cheney and Rumsfeld - Friday, June 30, 2006 12:36 PM
In an apparent retaliation for criticism of its disclosure of classified intelligence to America's enemies, the New York Times June 30th edition has printed huge color photos of the vacation residences of Vice President Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, identifying the small Maryland town where they live, showing the front driveway and in Rumsfeld's case actually pointing out the hidden security camera in case any hostile intruders should get careless:
Read the rest of the article here.
The NY Times is BEGGING for a treason indictment. I say let's give it to them.
Picture at right: The remaining baby bird just before leaving the nest.
UPDATE: I learned that my two birds are female Purple Finches. I saw one this morning (July 1) on my roof accompanied by two young males with the purple-red heads. Later she came and sat on one of the bars of the gazebo after I called to her.
In an earlier post I wrote about the bird nest in my backyard gazebo and how I became acquainted with the whole bird family, the mom, pop and two baby birds. Due to the red coloring on the father bird, I am pretty sure they are Purple Finches.
Alas, my little birds are gone. They’ve grown up and left the nest. On Tuesday morning I looked out the kitchen window and saw one of them on the roof of the gazebo, chirping away. She soon flew away and I have seen her no more.
Her sister, however, remained in the nest, reluctant to leave. On Wednesday, I stayed home from work and read in the gazebo. When I peeked into the nest, the remaining bird became frightened of me and flew out of the nest and into the mesh netting that encloses the gazebo. I put my hand under her and she briefly sat on my finger before flapping away again, halted by the mesh and sort of hovering there, chirping softly. This time I gently scooped her up with both my hands. She immediately quieted down and showed no fear, and I walked her back to the nest and placed her in it. She settled down and promptly went to sleep.
The next morning, Thursday, I became worried that this remaining bird might starve because she would not leave the nest. I tried to give her a piece of bread, but this just spooked her again and she flew out of the nest against the mesh again. I briefly touched her, but she slipped through the opening at the top of the mesh and flew chirping towards a tall, leafy tree in a neighbor’s back yard, a tree filled with other birds. So she has now left the nest too.
I looked in the nest last night to see if she might have returned, but she hasn’t. I miss the little birds. I am suffering from “empty nest syndrome”….literally. But I am at least pleased that the two birds grew up well and have successfully assumed life on their own. Now when I sit in the backyard to read, I will look at every Finch and wonder if it is one of my birds. It’d be nice if they'd visit once in a while or at least shoot me an email. Kids! They're all the same.
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
These are people who danced in the streets when Osama's thugs flew airplanes into the World Trade Center, murdering 3,000 innocent people. They just recently voted in vicious terrorists as their leaders, effectively giving the bird to any peace process. But the Left supports them with great crocodile tears, because the Left is sick to the bone. They are drawn to evil as a dog is to its own vomit.
Some of the Palestinians' other notable accomplishments: resisting all attempts to provide them with a country of their own, at peace and prosperity with its neighbor Israel. They don't want peace. They're Muslims. They want dead Jews. They want all of Israel (which they call Palestine), every bit of it, and have coined the slogan "From the River to the Sea" in support of their goal.
The Palestinians' latest accomplishment is the taking of a 19 year old Israeli soldier as hostage. Then they crossed into Israel and kidnapped an 18 year old Israeli boy who is believed dead (the body is so mutilated they can't be sure it's his) [Update: the body found was not that of the Israeli youth. The youth was found shot to death, his body left in an abandoned car.]. A month ago they bombed a restaurant in Israel, killing a 15 year old American Jewish boy, then publicly expressed joy at his death and their hopes for his soul to enter Hell.
I'll be honest. I detest the Palestinians, their cause, and the fools who support them. I have zero sympathy for their suffering because it is so egregiously self-inflicted. The Palestinians themselves are the authors of their fate, by their hatred, their bigotry, their foul religion, their psychotic culture. Do not pity them; they have none for you.
I'd like to see the Israelis drive them all out, into the surrounding Muslim despotisms and out of Israel. I'd like to see Israel get serious about paying them back in kind for the last 50 years of murder, terrorism and villainy. If they kidnap an Israeli boy, hold their leaders responsible and execute one of them in reprisal. If they bomb a restaurant or a bus in Israel, flatten their markets and mosques. For every Jew they kill, kill 100 of them. If that sounds harsh, so be it. The Palestinians have no feelings of sympathy for non-Muslims and appeals to their humanity will not work. They have none. It is time to appeal to their basic instincts for physical survival. It's time to make the Palestinians bleed.
All "peace talks" and negotiations with the Palestinians are futile and a waste of time. Using the Muslim doctrine of al-taqiya, or deception, they have never negotiated in good faith. It is time to assume they never will and to act accordingly.
Today Israeli tanks are rolling into Gaza. I wish them Godspeed. Destroy the Palestinian State! "From the River to the Sea" indeed! Liberate all of Israel and let the blue and white Star of David float over every square inch.
UPDATE: David Horowitz said this on his blog at Frontpagemag.com yesterday:
Hamas has murdered an 18 year old boy whose crime was that he was a Jew in
the West Bank. This lynching will not be protested by any Palestinian.
It probably won't be protested by any leftwing supporter of the
Palestinians either. Hamas is a Nazi organization dedicated to the destruction
of the Jewish state and the killing of Jews as a religious act. Hamas
leaders have written this creed in black and white and called it their
"covenant." Nonetheless they have the support of the majority of the Palestinian
people and their genocidal acts and agendas find sympathetic understanding
in the "social justice" left. If the Israelis were to execute every Hamas
leader they have captured tonight -- that would be simple social
justice. But no leftist and no Palestinian would accept it as such.
From Lawrence Auster's View From the Right, June 27:
A Pew Foundation poll of the attitudes of Muslims in six Muslim countries and four Western countries shows widespread Muslim support for terrorism and suicide bombing. In no Muslim population does a majority acknowledge that Arabs carried out the 9/11 attack. Daniel Pipes lamely concludes that the Pew survey “sends an undeniable message of crisis from one end to the other of the Muslim world.” Uh, no, Mr. Pipes—the crisis is not in the Muslim world, the crisis is in the Western world, which imported and now contains vast West-hating Muslim populations.
Of course, to be fair, in some Muslim countries only about 10% justify terrorism in support of Islam, though it is substantially higher in other countries like Nigeria. Gee, what's 10% of 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide? I believe that comes to a mere 150 million Muslims who believe in murdering people and blowing things up. And half of those are in Great Britain!
And some worrywarts are concerned. Of course there are always fanatics in every religion. They've got 150 million Osama Bin Ladens and we've got Pat Robertson. Well Robertson has never even harmed a fly, but he has made politically incorrect statements a time or two, and we are not prepared to quibble over the degree of one's fanaticism. Clearly 150 million Muslims and Pat Robertson are moral equivalents.
Now wait a minute Stogie, there was Timothy McVeigh, the fanatic who blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma. See, violent fanatics are not just limited to the Muslim religion! Well, of course, McVeigh was actually an atheist, but it is well known that he once drove by a Christian church. Again, let's not quibble over degrees of extremism.
We must face the sad truth: we're no better than they are. Bring the troops home now and order your wife a burqa.
Monday, June 26, 2006
Last night while reading through some of my favorite blogs, I learned that several Russian embassy employees, previously abducted in Baghdad, were beheaded by the insurgents. Butchered in cold blood while other Muslim bastards filmed it.
The reason the Muslim Spawn of Hell gave for the murders was that they were exacting revenge for the Russian crackdown on Muslim animals in Chechnya. Chechnya, you know, where these holy men of God murdered around 300 young school children.
I had to find some way to express my revulsion for this human scum and their evil and false religion. I found it. I created the graphic at left and am releasing it to the blogosphere. If you agree with the sentiments expressed, please do post it on your blogs and websites.
A mama bird has built a bird nest in the gazebo in my back yard. Apparently she did it when the weather was rainy and I wasn't using the gazebo as a place to read and smoke cigars. However, we met each other when the weather turned warm. Mama bird flew in with a piece of straw in her mouth, saw me sitting at the table in the gazebo, said "Eeek!" and flew out again. I informed my wife of the nest and told her no one was to disturb it until the baby birds were grown and gone.
For the past few weeks we have learned to get along. The mama bird sits on the babies at night and the father bird helps feed the two baby birds that have hatched. I sit there and watch this wonderful nature lesson from only a few feet away. The mama bird is a beige colored bird with a pale blue breast; the father bird resembles her but has red plumage on his head and wings and is quite pretty. Lately I have been able to see the baby birds flapping their wings. They have feathers now and I suspect they will be leaving the nest soon.
My gazebo birds and recent readings on evolution have made me aware of the cuckoo bird (true story), which visits England in the spring. See my realistic illustration of one of these above right.
The cuckoo bird isn't really nice. The mama cuckoo knows which species of birds lay eggs similar in shape and color to her own, and lays her eggs in other bird's nests so other mama birds will raise her young for her. The cuckoo lays her egg, then kicks one of the other eggs out of the nest so the number remains the same. (I didn't even know birds could count, so this was a surprise to me.) Then, when the baby cuckoo hatches, he kicks all the other eggs out so he is the sole beneficiary of his adopted mama bird. Often the baby cuckoo grows bigger than his adopted mom before he leaves.
I think this is pretty lame - the cuckoo is a guest in someone else's nest, where he destroys the host's future progeny while advancing his own. He is a hostile guest with hidden malevolent intent.
I don't know about you, but this reminds me of certain immigrants into England and the West in general. These human versions of the cuckoo bird move in and demand special favors, e.g. that the British flag and piggy banks be hidden from view as these offend them. They really squawk if anyone publishes cartoons poking fun at cuckoo birds, and make threatening noises about decapitating people, all the while protected by their host mama bird in spite of their really bad attitude. They not only want to destroy Western eggs, but maybe plant a few bombs and blow up the nest and maybe the whole darned tree. That's gratitude for you.
Amazingly enough, these nasty birds are welcome in Britain, Europe and North America where they are protected from criticism no matter what they say or do. Not surpisingly, they just keep migrating in greater and greater numbers. Where else can a bird crap all over his hosts while they feed, shelter and protect him?
Which leads us to this all-important question: which of the players in this scenario is the real cuckoo bird anyway?
I suspect that the real reason for advancing the "global warming" scare is to give government a good excuse to exert more control over business and the private sector. The Left couldn't do it with socialism or communism because the voters would never buy it, so now they look for back-door ways to accomplish the same thing.
The news on msn.com was that we are having our "hottest year in 400 years." However, that only means we are getting back to normal following abnormally cold years in the recent past.
In fact, there was a mini-ice age in the not so distant past. One website reports:
Western Europe experienced a general cooling of the climate between the yearsAnd in the 1970's scientists reported a global COOLING phenomenon that was leading to a disasterous new ice age. As reported by Senator Inhofe in a speech on global warming:
1150 and 1460 and a very cold climate between 1560 and 1850 that brought dire
consequences to its peoples. The colder weather impacted agriculture, health,
economics, social strife, emigration, and even art and literature. Increased
glaciation and storms also had a devastating affect on those that lived near
glaciers and the sea.
Appell and Blix sound very much like those who warned us in the 1970s that
the planet was headed for a catastrophic global cooling. On April 28, 1975,
Newsweek printed an article titled, "The Cooling World," in which the magazine
warned: "There are ominous signs that the earth’s weather patterns have begun to
change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food
production—with serious political implications for just about every nation on
earth."In a similar refrain, Time magazine for June 24, 1974 declared: "However
widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when
meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that
the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades."In
1974 the National Science Board, the governing body of the National Science
Foundation, stated: "During the last 20 to 30 years, world temperature has
fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade." Two years
earlier, the board had observed: "Judging from the record of the past
interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an
end. . . leading into the next glacial age."
So don't be overly alarmed at this latest Leftist campaign to advance their big government schemes. Global warming is just a lot of hot air.
Thursday, June 22, 2006
My background: I am informed on the subject of evolution as I was once a biology major in college, until I realized I was facing starvation upon graduation. I then changed my major to Business and Accounting. Nevertheless, I was thoroughly convinced of the truth of evolution by the time I graduated, and was not particularly troubled by it. I figured the universe and everything in it was made by God, and it wasn’t up to me to dictate to Him how He should go about it.
Below I consider why I found evolution so believable and why I’ve changed my mind.
1. Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny – embryos of higher life forms seem to repeat their evolutionary development, starting off as one celled organisms that become a blastula (like a sponge), then a gastrula (simple animals with a tummy) then a fish (with gills, a simple heart, etc) and on until maturity. However, the apparent replay of evolutionary development in an embryo is subjective and based on appearance, not functionality (the so-called gill slits in human embryos have no actual function).
2. Homology – organisms in a class, like mammals, tend to be similar in anatomy and blood and immunities as other organisms in their class, insinuating that they all derived from a common ancestor. This is also subjective and unprovable. If the basic architecture of a bear works well for the bear, why shouldn’t it also work well for another mammal (like a horse)? Evolutionists resort to their own religious or metaphysical arguments in the issue of homology and other aspects of evolution, claiming that if God made the animals they would all be constructed differently. In short, they use their own personal conceptions of God to argue for evolution.
3. Vestigial organs – Unused organs have long been cited as compelling evidence for evolution, like the appendix, hair covering mans’ body, the tail bone or coccyx, the pineal gland, etc. Many organs believed to be vestigial when Darwin was alive have now been found to be functional (the appendix functions as part of the immune system and the coccyx is a fastening point for certain ligaments). This argument in favor of evolution has lost enormous steam since 1859, the date Origin of Species was published.
4. Irreducible Complexity – Recent arguments against evolution state that complex mechanisms like the human eye could not have evolved, since they are composed of numerous complex structures and systems that are interdependent and necessary for the functionality of the eye. Darwin himself admitted this issue, using the eye as an example, but argued that “counterintuitive observations” shouldn’t be used to refute the theory of evolution, because we can’t always dismiss complex phenomena as impossible based solely on our intuition. (Unless of course, the phenomenon is creationism or God.) Ann Coulter humorously compares the “counter-intuitive” argument to the Marx Brothers, who used to ask, “Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?” Evolutionists live by a double standard in this argument, because they have no problem using their intuition to confirm evolution where there is no testable proof.
5. The fossil record – In college I was most impressed by drawings of various horses that seemed to follow a clear evolutionary path, with simple and small horses with toes developing into larger horses with less toes, until we get to the modern horse with no toes, only one hoof per foot. Lately I have learned that the famous horse drawings were largely mistaken. Many of the horses lived at the same time as the other horses, and when new species appeared in the fossil record, they did so suddenly.
The basic problem with the fossil record is its almost complete absence of any animals that could be considered transitional forms. It does not support the theory of evolution. In fact, when Darwin first published Origin of Species his biggest critics were not ministers but paleontologists.
6. The Cambrian explosion – In a period of about 5 million years, all of the modern forms of life suddenly appeared with no apparent ancestors or precursors. This is one of the most troubling problems for evolutionists.
7. Evolutionists’ use of metaphysical arguments – almost all major evolutionary theorists justify the theory as being true only because creation can’t be true. They argue that if God created life, He would have done a better job of it, made different species better adapted to their environments, and would have created the species all at once rather than over millions of years. I mean, what was God doing, tinkering around and experimenting? However, the theory of evolution should not rest on evolutionists’ personal beliefs about God or the nature of God, as these are decidedly unscientific arguments.
8. The cell – The smallest unit of life, the cell, is mind-boggling in its complexity. How it could have somehow developed from a puddle of organic goo definitely strains credulity. Even smaller than a cell, a strand of DNA is very complicated and the same argument applies.
9. The flexibility of the theory of evolution -- The theory of evolution has been adapting itself to new facts over the past 150 years. The theory is very adaptible, in that its proponents assume it to be true and so it is bent, scissored and rearranged to explain new facts as they arise.
10. The lack of laboratory evidence -- the theory cannot be proven in the laboratory as can other theories; it has no premises or principles that can be demonstrated experimentally, no outcomes that can be predicted and thus proven. The theory of evolution has got to be the shakiest theory in the history of science. It is all built on presupposition and conjecture.
Since I had my “Road to Damascus” moment a week ago and switched sides in this debate, I am doing something I would never have considered only a few months ago: I am reading books that rebut evolution. I am currently reading Darwin’s God: Evolution and the Problem of Evil by Cornelius G. Hunter, a biophysicist. Hunter is one of a growing number of scientists who have grave doubts about the accuracy of Darwin’s theory. Hunter is not sensationalistic nor does he espouse religious views in his book. He merely deals with the major premises of the theory of evolution, the evidence that does exist and the problems with it, and does so in an objective tone. I will read more books on the subject when I finish this one.
What does this all mean to me personally? If evolution didn’t create life on Earth, what natural or supernatural forces did? I can’t answer that because I don’t know, but I do know that my sense of wonder at life has been largely restored.
Saturday, June 17, 2006
An anonymous poster has challenged Ann Coulter’s rebuttal of Darwin in her recent book "Godless," as described in my previous post. This post will add additional source material as to why Ann Coulter is right and anonymous is wrong.
Anonymous poo-poos Coulter’s use of the Cambrian period as proof that the appearance of new species in the fossil record were often sudden and vast, not steady and gradual as in Darwin's theory.
Here’s what Wikipedia says about the Cambrian period – pretty much the same way it is described by Coulter.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Cambrian is a major division of the geologic timescale that begins about 542 mya (million years ago) at the end of the Proterozoic eon and ended about 488.3 Ma with the beginning of the Ordovician period (ICS, 2004). It is the first period of the Paleozoic era of the Phanerozoic eon. The Cambrian is the earliest period in whose rocks are found numerous large, distinctly-fossilizable multicellular organisms that are more complex than sponges or medusoids. During this time, roughly fifty separate major groups of organisms or "phyla" (a phylum defines the basic body plan of some group of modern or extinct animals) emerged suddenly, in most cases without evident precursors. This radiation of animal phyla is referred to as the Cambrian explosion.
As for the mathematical possibility that life on earth evolved by random chance, Coulter quotes some very distinguished scientists who reject Darwin’s theory.
The first of these scientists is Lehigh University biochemist Michael Behe, who wrote a book called “Darwin’s Black Box.” Behe describes various “irreducibly complex” mechanisms (of which there are thousands) whose creation by chance is mathematically absurd. These include complex cellular structures, blood clotting mechanisms and the eye, among others. Coulter quotes several other prominent scientists conceding points to Behe, i.e there is no comprehensive and detailed explanation of the probable steps in the evolution of these mechanisms.
Two other distinguished scientists who have demonstrated the statistical impossibility of Darwin’s evolution are Cambridge astrophysicist Fred Hoyle and his collaborator Chandra Wickramasinghe. Hoyle and Wickramsinghe were awarded the Dag Hammarskjold Gold Medal for Science in 1996. Hoyle won several medals on his own, including the Oxford Prize and the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society. Wickramasinghe holds the highest doctorate degree from Cambridge and is professor of applied mathematics and astronomy at Cardiff University.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe are both atheists. I doubt that they believed the earth was created in six days or that it is only 6,000 years old. Anyone who disputes evolution is often categorized as a Christian fundamentalist. As Ann Couter puts it, "You will begin to notice that the Darwiniacs' answer to everything is to accuse their opponents of believing in God - and a flat Earth for good measure - even when responding to an argument based on chemistry, physics or mathematics."
Hoyle & Wickramasinghe calculated the mathematical probability that the basic enzymes of life arose from random processes. They found the odds to be 1 to 1 followed by 40 zeroes. This was, as they said, “so miniscule as to make Darwin’s theory of evolution absurd.”
Their opinion was shared by Francis Crick, winner of the Nobel Prize for his codiscovery of DNA. Crick said “The probability of life originating at random is so utterly miniscule as to make it absurd.”
David Raup, a geologist at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago states that Darwin was embarrassed by the lack of fossil evidence to support his theory, and devoted a long section of his Origin of Species to rationalize the difference. Raup wrote, “There were several problems, but the principal one was that the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”
My anonymous poster also disputes the reality of the ACLU suing to keep information on Chinese research into the Cambrian period out of the classroom. However, they did just that. A high school biology teacher, Robert DeHart, of Burlington-Edison High School in Washington State, was their target. DeHart liked to supplement his curriculum with newspaper articles from the Boston Globe and the New York Times about the Chinese fossils of the Cambrian period. He never mentioned God. After the ACLU threatened to sue, the school removed DeHart from his biology teaching position and replaced him with a recent teaching graduate who had majored in physical education. Coulter concludes: “Thus were the students of Burlington-Edison High School saved from having to hear scientific facts that might cause them to question their faith in the official state religion.” Amen to that!
Mr. Anonymous has concluded that Coulter’s new book is nonsense and not worth reading. Don’t keep a closed mind like Mr. Anonymous. Buy and read the book. It is highly informative and funny as hell.
Thursday, June 15, 2006
Coulter kept me laughing throughout the book, by making side references to liberals, Democrats and even some of Bush's friends like Harriet Myers. Her thesis in this book is that liberalism is a religion itself, as many of its premises and precepts are based on faith, believed without factual support. Indeed, Liberals become almost as incensed as Muslims do when you question their holy writ. Liberals will go to extremes to ensure that their point of view is the only one that can be heard, and they seek a monopoly on the public pulpit through lawsuits, NY Times editorials and school room instruction, all while hysterically denouncing those who disagree.
I found Coulter's examination of Darwinism and the theory of evolution to be absolutely fascinating. I admit I was somewhat uneasy when I began the chapter on evolution. I have studied evolution several times, in high school biology, in college courses in zoology, anthropology and genetics and I have been exposed to the theory more than most folks. I have in the past, even gotten into serious debates and arguments with relatives and others who did not believe in evolution. I only opened my mind a crack over the past couple of years, after I heard of several distinguished scientists who think evolution is a crock. Say what??
I was pleasantly surprised at reading Coulter's treatment of the subject. She did not argue Bible scriptures or create straw men merely for the purpose of knocking them down. She quotes Darwin and scientists who support him, discusses the major premises of the theory and then points out its weaknesses, while quoting opposing scientific opinions. In other words, she treats the subject fairly, using scientific facts as her arguments and not, as I'd feared, religious ones.
Coulter illustrates how complex life really is and uses as an example the most simple dynoflagellate, a one celled animal with a flagellum it uses to propel itself. Even it requires several complex protein molecules to manage its flagellum, and it is difficult to discern the mechanism by which these proteins evolved by chance.
She then went into the mathematical possibility that complex and diverse life forms on this planet all originated from organic goo and changed and evolved based on genetic mutation and natural selection. She quoted the works of various anti-evolution scientists, some of who were atheists, who describe large problems with the theory of evolution, stating flat-out that the mathematical odds of it happening make the theory absurd.
Coulter also discussed Chinese research into the Cambrian period, a period of about 5 to 10 million years when life forms burst forth in great proliferation, according to the fossil record. Their appearance, in paleontology terms, was sudden and vast, as one scientist put it, "almost as if they had been planted here." The ACLU, however, has sued to keep this information out of public schools and scientific journals have so far neglected to cover it.
Coulter also considers some of the classic "proofs" of evolution, like the Piltdown man (a hoax), the German drawings of different animal fetuses compared to humans, showing remarkable similarities in appearance (also a hoax), the amino acid from gasses experiment (the experiment and its results were real, but the gasses used were not the ones in the earth's atmosphere when life originated) and several others. In spite of this, many of these disproven or misrepresented "facts" still appear in modern biology textbooks. Further, and I did not realize this before, the fossil record does not come close to proving evolution. There are great gaps in the record, there are few or no transitional forms from one creature to another, and many animals appear suddenly and disappear just as suddenly again. Something was going on, something miraculous in human terms, but what we really can't say. Those who say it was God don't sound quite so preposterous any more.
For me, her book wiped the blackboard clean as far as evolution goes. If it is true, it is not even close to being proved, and there are major problems with it. I will never be a proponent of it again, absent some remarkable new scientific discoveries in its favor. But what is really revealing is how dogmatic the pro-evolution scientific community is, how close-minded they are to any other possibility, and how much their beliefs are based on their own form of faith. So much so, that they sue to prevent other viewpoints from being presented, and persecute those among them who step out of line. For example, one scientist was banned from the Smithsonian after writing a paper on intelligent design (which is not the dopey theory we've been led to believe) that appeared in an obscure scientific journal. The scientist has had to sue to keep his job.
Coulter also savages that film "Inherit the Wind," the Hollywood version of the Scopes Trial, where close-minded, drooling Christian fundamentalists try to jail a young teacher for teaching evolution in Dawson, Tennessee sometime in the 1920's. The true story is that the trial was a publicity stunt designed to put Dawson "on the map" with enormous publicity. The trial was staged by the ACLU who paid for both the prosecution and the defense attorneys, and John Scopes volunteered to be sued "for teaching evolution" in response to an ad. Not only did he not go to jail (teaching evolution was only a misdemeanor), but an Appeals Court even threw out his $100 fine. He was rehired by the same school district for the following year. So much for drooling fundamentalists persecuting bright young teachers.
Anytime a book can change my mind about something I once strongly believed in, it's got to be a good book. I experienced a paradigm shift. I highly recommend it.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
The Left hates everything and everyone to the right of Kim Jong Il, so that includes Karl Rove, an advisor and political strategist to President Bush. In fact, they like to pick out a single target and go after it. It's a good way to focus their hatred, their kookiness, their irrationality and helps keep them off the street.
I am neither enamored of George Bush (too liberal) or Karl Rove (strategy, what strategy?) but I do enjoy how they drive the Moonbat Left absolutely nuts. To me, a great event is one that produces a larger than usual amount of drool from the kids at KOS, Moveon.org, and Democratic Underground.
In fact, the Moonbats believe passionately in any silly conspiracy theory you can name. They think there is a high cabal pulling strings and making events happen according to some fantastic script, and that it is all for political power reasons or to get "more oil."
They're right of course. The whole fake Karl Rove possible indictment scenario was just to build their hopes for a serious letdown, all part of the power plot to piss them off. It's all carefully described in Verse 27, Chapter 16 of "Protocols of the Elders of Zion." You can look it up.
So here's to you, Moonbats! Enjoy! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Monday, June 12, 2006
Zarqawi liked to play with other people's heads until the U.S. Military blew him up! Now we can play with Zarqawi's head and have lots of fun!
We suggest a sports use for the head, as Zarqawi loved an active life.
Sunday, June 11, 2006
Last night my wife and I went to see Andrea Bocelli, the great opera tenor, at the San Jose Arena. Funny, the San Jose Arena is where the San Jose Sharks play hockey, but they can defrost the floor and rearrange some chairs, and voila! The hockey rink becomes an opera house. Sort of. In any case, the arena is a very large place where professional tennis matches are held, and famous orchestras and singers perform, in addition to hockey.
Bocelli was backed by a great orchestra and had two other opera singers perform with him, a man and a young woman. All three had incredible voices. The music and singing ignited the soul and sent it soaring.
Andrea Bocelli was recently one of the music tutors on "American Idol," but the performances last night made "American Idol" seem quite juvenile by comparison. Idol runner-up Katherine McPhee sang with Bocelli for three songs, in Italian. She was very nervous, though she has great natural, if untrained, talent. She was sharp on the first song and flat on the second, and I now know what the Idol judges were talking about when they describe a performance as "pitchy."
The music was wonderful, and because it is such a healing force for the human soul, it is no real surprise the Islam forbids it. We have so much to lose, including music, if this evil ideology ever becomes the dominant force in the world. Enjoy your freedoms, music, your dogs and cats, your religion - they will all be gone if we do not defeat or at the very least, contain Islam to its sandlot in the Middle East.
Never take the good things in life for granted.
Friday, June 09, 2006
A GRAPHIC FOR THE BLOGOSPHERE
I created this icon for my photoshopped image titled "President Bush's Announcement." It is a transparent gif file, which means the background is invisible and you can insert into Photoshopped pictures or web pages without a big colored square around the image.
Now I am releasing the image to the blogosphere! Create some interesting graphics with it (or just put it on your blog's heading or sidebar) and help the world celebrate the death of a very evil man.
See my use of this graphic in the Photoshopped image below. Also, see what it looks like in a web page at http://atticghosts.blogspot.com/.
Thursday, June 08, 2006
From the AP:
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al-Qaida leader in Iraq who waged a bloody campaign of suicide bombings and beheadings of hostages, has been killed in a precision airstrike, U.S. and Iraqi officials said Thursday. It was a long-sought victory in the war in Iraq. (Read the rest of the article.)
Al-Zarqawi is the animal who liked to cut off the heads of bound hostages while his animalistic lieutenants filmed it with a video cam. My only regret was that his death was fast. I would have preferred incredible pain and suffering and horror, but what the heck, dead is dead.
So rot in Hell, Zarqawi, you evil BASTARD. At last you are reunited with your FALSE Prophet, the lying, raping and murdering bastard known as Muhammad.
SWEET DREAMS AL ZARQAWI! May God visit upon you tenfold the horror and pain and suffering that you inflicted on other people while you polluted the earth with your presence.
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
Osama's announcement and Hillary's expression say it all. Can you really trust this woman to manage the war on terror? I think not.
See next example below.
This example shows the more practical side of Photoshop. Take one pretty girl in a bikini. (I've cropped the lower half of the picture as I know my intellectual readers are only interested in the technical aspects of this discussion.)
Our lovely lady was having a bad hair day when the picture was taken. (Had I not cropped the lower half of the picture you wouldn't have noticed.) So Stogie the Hair Dresser gave her a rinse and a comb-out and voila! Now she's not only pretty, but glamorous to boot. The hair in the picture to the right is totally digital, i.e. produced by Photoshop. I lightened her hair so you could better see the individual strands of hair (click on photo to see the enlarged version). So you can see how Photoshop can be used for publicity photos and other commercial purposes.
It's fun. We'll get back to more serious fare tomorrow. Or not.
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Today is the primary election in California where I live. I always vote come hell or high water. They had new electronic voting machines at the polling place, and asked if I wanted to use one of them or if I wanted the old punched card system. Being a high tech junkie, I opted for the new touch screen electronic voting machine.
After asking the officials how to reboot or get internet access, they grinned politely and gave me a plastic card to insert in the machine. Once they produce the card, you have 15 minutes to vote. No problem, I always come prepared, with my mailed sample ballot marked in advance.
It was the easiest voting I ever did. You touch the screen to mark each box, push next to go to the next screen, and get a chance to review a paper copy of your vote before finalizing it. You can make changes if you made a mistake. I didn't, so touched the submit ballot icon on the screen and I was all done.
I could only vote for Republicans, because that's what I am registered as, so I voted for Arnold Schwarzenegger for Governator again. But, I did so without much enthusiasm. Arnie's a political chameleon who will change his stripes to whatever color the voters want, and Californians overwhelmingly prefer pink candidates and a blue state. The best man for the job is running for Lt. Governor, however, and that is Tom McClintock, a conservative Republican who knows the state like the back of his hand. Ask any question on any subject related to governing the state of California and he will give you an answer that is highly informed, well reasoned and sensible. Republican voters rejected him last time because they were afraid he couldn't win in California.
We've just got to get Tom to beef up and make a few movies as a killing machine from the future. Some sunglasses wouldn't hurt either. I mean, what's really important anyway?
I drew the above pic of the Governator back in 2003. It's one of the best things I ever drew, I think.
Monday, June 05, 2006
President Ronald Reagan died two years ago today. It's a hard date for me to forget, since he died on my wedding anniversary. I have been married to my dear wife thirty years today. (Well I told you I'm a geezer.)
I drew this picture of President Reagan three days after he died, copying one of my favorite photos of him.
President Reagan was a perpetual optimist who loved his country and the American people.
He was one of those rare politicians who makes you feel proud to be an American.
I loved the guy. I voted for him twice.
Sunday, June 04, 2006
A couple of years ago I saw that Brad Pitt movie, "Troy." I was intrigued to learn all I could about ancient Troy (did it really exist? What really happened?). I read all I could find about it on the net.
The story of Troy was one of two epic poems written by a blind Ionian poet named Homer. Or at least that's what the legend says. When you go back far enough into history, you enter the realm of legend where fact and myth become intermixed, and what is really true is not completely known. The Legend of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table is an example. So is the story of Troy. But no matter, often these legends impart important moral lessons and act as guides for our own lives and times.
You've all heard the story of Troy. A Trojan named Paris couldn't keep his toga buttoned, and fell in love with a Greek woman named Helen, young wife of King Menelaus. So Paris abducted Helen and took her back to Troy, a walled city overlooking the sea in what is now Turkey. Troy really did exist, but is today only rubble and ruins.
Helen's hiatus didn't set well with the king, who launched an armada of ships (supposedly 1,000 of them) to retrieve Helen, who was now called "Helen of Troy." The ships were full of Greek soldiers, including a bad-ass named Achilles, who legend tells us was a real heel. The Trojans remained safe in their walled city for over ten years while the Greeks slept on the beach and became increasingly pissed off. But the Trojans did come out to play a few times and knocked off a few of the Greeks. Hector killed Patroclus, best buddy of Achilles, who then challenged Hector to a fight.
Hector was a brave and decent man, fighting for his people and his city, but not too bright. Instead of having his archers turn Achilles into a pin cushion, and having the mainstream media write scrolls claiming it was an atrocity, Hector accepted the challenge.
He went out of the city and fought Achilles, who promptly killed him. Achilles then tied Hector's body to his chariot and dragged it around the city a few times. Talk about adding insult to injury. Paris, the guy who started this whole rumble in the first place, later slays Achilles in battle by shooting Achilles in the heel with a poisoned arrow. Serves him right, I say.
Well to make a long epic short, the Greeks were getting bored with the game, so they pretended to sail away in their triremes. But before they did, they left a great big wooden horse outside the main gate of Troy, a gift to the gods, they said. The overjoyed Trojans then took the big horse inside Troy's walls as a kind of war prize.
The picture above is a replica of the Trojan Horse as depicted on ancient urns. You'd think the windows and doors and the ladder on the horse would have caused some suspicion in the Trojans, but they were the dhimmi-liberals of antiquity. The warning signs were there, but they believed what they wanted to believe and couldn't or wouldn't see the obvious. Maybe they were afraid of being accused of profiling or ethnic intolerance if they assumed evil intent on the part of their guests. The most likely scenario is that after so many years of war they desperately needed to believe that peace had finally come. They were wilfully blind to any other possibility.
That night, the Greek soldiers hiding in the horse came out and opened the gate to the rest of the Greek army, who then sacked the city and murdered the male inhabitants. The Trojan women were taken as slaves. Hector's infant son was thrown from the walls and killed, and his wife taken as a sex slave by one of the Greek officials. (That's from the book. It was rewritten for the screenplay.) There are fates worse than death, and Hector suffered one.
In the end, Troy was a city who was successfully infiltrated by an enemy who feigned peace and hid its malevolent intent. If you can't see the parallels between the Trojan Horse and massive immigration of Muslims into the West, then you haven't been paying attention.
Just this week authorities in England and Canada raided Muslim terrorist cells, made arrests and, in Canada, retrieved two tons of explosives. Before that, we had 9/11 in the U.S., 4/11 in Spain, and 7/7 in London. Muslim terrorists killed Westerners each time. More Westerners will die as long as the enemy remains in our midst.
Like the Trojans, we are importing our own executioners. The enemy is inside the gate and it is we who have let him in.
Back in the early 70's when my brothers and I had a rock band, we liked to play a Johnny Rivers tune called "The Snake." I don't know why, but while contemplating the recent treachery of Muslim immigrants to Western nations,the words to this old song just popped into my head. I wonder if there is a connection?
Well duh! You judge. Here are the lyrics to that great old Rock tune.
On the way to work one morning
Down the path along side the lake
A tender hearted woman
Found a poor half-frozen snake
His pretty colored skin
Had been all frosted with the dew
'Poor thing' she cried, 'I'll take you in
And I'll take care of you.'
Take me in oh tender woman
Take me in for heaven's sake
Take me in oh tender woman
S-S-S-Sighed the Snake
She wrapped him up all cozy
In a comforter of silk
And laid him by the fireside
With some honey and some milk
She hurried home from work that night
And as soon as she arrived
She found that pretty snake she'd taken in had been revived.
Take me in oh tender woman
Take me in for heaven's sake
Take me in oh tender woman
S-S-S-Sighed the Snake
She clutched him to her bosom
'You're so beautiful' she cried
'But if I hadn't brought you in by now you might have died.'
Well she stroked his pretty skin again
And kissed him really tight,
Instead of saying thanks,
the snake gave her a vicious bite.
Take me in oh tender woman
Take me in for heaven's sake
Take me in oh tender woman
S-S-S-Sighed the Snake
'I saved you!' cried the woman
'And you've bitten me but why?'
'You know your bite is poisonous
And now I'm gonna die.'
'Ah shut up, silly woman.'
Said that reptile with a grin.
'You knew darn well I was a snake before you took me in.'
Take me in oh tender woman
Take me in for heaven's sake
Take me in oh tender woman
S-S-S-Sighed the Snake
Take me in oh tender woman
Take me in for heaven's sake
Take me in oh tender woman
S-S-S-Sighed the Snake
Saturday, June 03, 2006
Recently it has become clear that Google's Management is composed of liberal Moonbats who censor conservative sites. In response, the conservative blogosphere has been searching for alternatives to the Google Search Engine. However, Google is so good that using another search engine seems like "settling" for something lesser. Even as a matter of principle, that doesn't set well with us capitalists. We like to use the best.
Well take heart, fellow wingnuts. According to Fortune Magazine, there is now a serious search engine that is in some ways SUPERIOR to Google, and at least as good in other respects. That search engine is Ask.com (previously known as Askjeeves.com). Fortune describes ask.com as "Google's up-and-coming rival."
Slashdot.net, a web e-zine "for nerds" says this: "Fortune magazine takes a look at Ask.com, a site originally designed to respond to queries in human language that grew into a full-blown search engine after the Teoma acquisition. According to Fortune, Ask.com has many features not available with rivals -- topic clusters, quick facts from Wikipedia on the search page, and, (what counts most) fewer ads than any of the rivals. Currently Ask.com maintains 5.9% share, a share that Fortune is sure will grow."
So kids, you no longer have to sacrifice quality for principle. Try ask.com; use it instead of Google. It searches the web for articles, images, news, maps & directions, weather, encyclopedia, shopping, and even has a category called "blogs and feeds."
Spread the word through the blogosphere. Feel free to copy and paste this text if you are too busy to write your own article.
Friday, June 02, 2006
This cartoon appeared this week, courtesy of the Palestinians. It appeared in the May 25th issue of Al-Risala, a Hamas weekly newspaper. It shows a Palestinian child peeing on the Statue of Liberty.
We are not amused, so we drew our response cartoon, which appears below.
In case you're wondering what the book
is that our American boy is peeing on,
it's the "Holy" Qur'an.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Here's Pim's message:
Here is the response and the original message he sent me today. YT is yanking all of his videos. I'm going to try and figure this all out and also flag anything jihadi I can. That Malted idiot flagged all of my videos and threatened to get me kicked off, I think he got Crusader18 first.
Anyway, here's the message [from Crusader18]:
Yes My Dear Pimsghost,The have pulled 3 of my videos down in 24 hours. YT it seems is run by either Muslims or Dhimmis(Liberals) and the censorsghip is happening. I have attached the Video that I want flagged as innappropriate. "koferi" Put up by 'Jihad4u' as hateful a deathmonger as there is on youtube. Youtube pulls down my Vids as fast as I put them up. They Ignor the Flaggings that I do on Jihadist Propaganda videos and any attempts to have my grievences heard. They have pulled vids that were harmless; 60yr old Bugs Bunny Cartoon, Southpark Mohammad(even though there was no picture or cartoon of Mohad)They(the handchoppers and YT decide what I and we can post or not. Right now I have a more than a dozen that say...: Rejected (content inappropriate) That were viewed (in some cases) THOUSANDS OF TIMES! Yet this one I posted at the same time as the 2 latest taken downhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfP3MK0y-aw REMAINS!
The most amazing thing about this is...Many of my "rejects" are up on YT already by other Users!!! Same name, same file same discriptions same tags...(I copyed them to test a theory) POOF! There's stay, and mine get yanked or denied outright...The same clips. They can, will, and do F**K with people who they don't agree with. If you have an email address to share, I will send you Clips you can either Post or view.(I would post them to test) I am also sending this additional call to arms that follows...(Please Send the following, and resend it. The video doesn't even have a "confirm" screen yet.)Kind RegardsMichaelSubject:Islamists on YouTube...They get our Videos Pulled Yet Their Hate and Blood filled garbage Videos remains. Flag This 'Cult of Death' porn for what it is...Inappropriate! Here's the plan:Flag this video as Inappropriate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyymEhCSqQE Pass it on to all your friends. have them pass it to there friends in 3 cycles we're at 10s of thousands of flags and then...On to the next. We do this until one by one they are denied access to post this stuff. It's called Interdiction...DO THIS!!! Together, WE can DO THIS. We can as free users of OUR INTERNET, INTERDICT this ONE SITE and DENY ACCESS To the ISLAMISTS...PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PASS THIS ON AND ON AND ON>>>>>>>>>>>This is your Clarion Call To Do What You CAN DO TO FIGHT THEM.Thank you ALL,Crusader(CRUSADER18)BTW- I wish to read replies to this request from people I've never even heard of before. We start with one. When it's GONE, we go on to the next. But first, we start with the one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyymEhCSqQE