Leaderboard

Evolution doesn't say things happened purely "by accident". It says that accidents introduce random variations and that successful variations are selected by natural processes. https://app.box.com/s/uclytd91jd Let’s take a look at a simple example. Assume your phone number is 10 digits long and consists of numbers between one and six (simply to correspond to the number of sides on a dice – no other reason). It could be something like 214-635-4125. If you throw a dice 10 times, the odds of coming up with this number simply by chance would be one in 60,466,176. I wouldn’t be placing any bets on this happening. But, let’s introduce a selection bias into this trial. Every time you throw a correct number, it gets locked in place. You can then throw again for the remaining numbers. On your first pass through, you should get one or two correct numbers (well, 1.67 to be exact). On your second pass through, you should get another one. Eventually, you will need to make multiple throws to get a correct number. Statistically, you should have the number within 60 throws. That’s a far cry from over 60 million. What we have just done is take a random occurance and overlay it with a non-random selection bias. So, how does this work in the real world? Well, let’s look at another example. In West Africa, malaria is a huge killer. However, there is a genetic variation that allows people to be much more malaria resistant than those who do not have it. The odds of this mutation arising spontaneously are slim. Let’s make up a large number. Assume that the odds are one in ten billion. Now, take the historical population of West Africa (possibly between a few thousand in times long passed, and hundreds of millions today). Add up the number of people who have ever lived in this area throughout history. You now have a situation where this mutation should have occurred. Once it has occurred, the person who has it is likely to be long lived, increasing his/her chance of passing this mutation on to more offspring. Before long, the success of the mutation has allowed it to become widespread. In order for millions of people to end up with this mutation, it does not have to occur millions of times. It only has to occur once, and then be successfully preserved and replicated. This is only one of many real life examples. It is true that favorable mutations are extremely rare. But, there are a lot of living things, and a lot of time has passed. When one of these favorable mutations occurs, it usually gets locked in place by its own success, then spreads like wild fire. Unsuccessful mutations tend to make people very unsuccessful, possibly even killing them immediately. These mutations are quickly discarded. And, this isn’t the only non-random factor in evolution. Favorable traits make a person or animal more attractive to the opposite sex, increasing their likelihood of passing on favorable genes. They are less likely to fall victim to predators. As well, some characteristics are adaptations (rather than mutations) that enter the population through repetition. So, you can calculate the “odds” of evolution happening by random chance, but what’s the point? Evolution never said it was totally random.

https://app.box.com/s/uclytd91jd THE FLOOD One of the more colorful stories in the Bible is the story of the flood. It is a story that appeals to the imagination. It contains all the elements of a good children’s story - animals, crime and punishment, sweeping events that captivate the reader’s interest, and a happy ending. In fact, children’s literature is precisely where the flood story should end up, placed along side Mother Goose and Cinderella. There are many reasons why the flood story as told by the Bible could never have happened. For instance, the amount of water required to cover the highest mountains would be astronomical. It is physically impossible for the atmosphere to absorb that much water, and drop it as rain. Even if it could be done, five miles of water hovering over the heads of the pre-deluge earth would have created atmospheric pressure so intense that they would have been as flat as pancakes, not to mention the fact that they would be in complete darkness due to the blocking of light from the sun. Core samples of arctic ice show no evidence of either a global flood or a pre-flood tropical climate. Then there is the fact that several civilizations, such as the Egyptian and the Chinese, have written histories that predate the flood. The pyramids were built about two hundred years before the flood, and show no water damage. And, of course, the zoological difficulties are huge. How could fresh water and salt water fish survive in a common pool? And, did Noah drop off kangaroos in Australia on his way to Ararat? The list of arguments against the literal interpretation of the flood account is so long that it would be tiresome to go through it all. Besides, others have already done this better than I can. Most people don’t take it seriously, anyway. I would like to take a completely different approach. I will assume that the flood story is literally true in all of its details, and follow the logic through to its inevitable conclusion. Particularly, I am concerned with its motivation. To begin, a short recap of the events is in order. The Story of the Flood After the creation of the human race, things went along on their merry way for a long time. If you follow the list of who begat whom, and how long each of them lived, you come to the conclusion that Adam was created around 4000 BC. But, after about a millennium and a half, trouble started to brew. Some angels became inflamed with lust for human women and took on human form. They mated with humans, forming a race of huge bullies. Things got so bad that God decided that he would wipe out all life from the earth and start over again. It turns out that in all the earth, there was only one good man. So, God told this man, Noah, to build a huge boat that would house samples of every form of non-water based life. Then, after working for 100 years, God loaded Noah, his family, and all the animals onto the ark, and then it started to rain. By this time, it was around the year 2400 BC. It rained for 40 days and nights, during which time, enough water fell to cover even the highest mountains. When the earth was wiped clean, the waters receded, and Noah let his family and the animals out of the ark to begin repopulating the planet. At this point, we must pause a moment to consider the nature of angels. According to the Bible, angels are direct creations of God. They do not reproduce. As well, they do not have the inherited original sin of Adam and Eve to taint them. They are perfect. This does not mean that they are incapable of sin. It merely means that they are incapable of accidental sin. If an angel sins, it is because he meant it. It also means that if an angel feels sexual desire, it must have been placed there by his creator. In order for an angel to become inflamed with lust for a human woman, it would be necessary for the angel to have a sex drive of some sort. If they were completely neuter in every way, they would find human women about as attractive as we find rocks. For this story to function, God must have created angels with sex drives. Conclusion # 1: Angels are created with a sex drive. Now that we have established this unusual fact, let’s continue. Notice that the Bible says that the angels found human women attractive, and they took on the bodies of men. Also, notice that it does not say that any of them found human men attractive, and none of them took on the bodies of women. This leads us inescapably to our next conclusion. Conclusion # 2: All angels are men. Some of you may be tempted to jump ahead of me, but let’s go slow, and develop this carefully. Our next area of inquiry is regarding the possibility of angelic reproduction. Jesus gives us some insight into the nature of angelic interrelationships: “For in the resurrection, neither do men marry, nor are women given in marriage, but are as the angels in heaven.” - Matthew 22:30 (NWT) In addition to this direct statement, we note that there is no reference anywhere in the Bible to female angels, angelic marriage, or angelic reproduction of any sort. This leads us to our next conclusion: Conclusion # 3: Angels have no natural outlet for their sexual urges. Finally, I must add some information regarding the quantities of angels. The book of Daniel makes reference to “ten thousand times ten thousand” standing before God. A quick multiplication shows that there are one hundred million angels present in this scene, and there may be others as well. Also, angels have been in existence for a long time. The Bible says that God rested after creating Adam and Eve, so any angels that exist must have been created before them; therefore, angels are ancient. Conclusion # 4: There are lots and lots of angels and they have a lot of time on their hands. Now, for the slower ones among us, who have not yet figured out what I am getting at, let’s put all four conclusions together, and finish this off: · Angels are created with a sex drive · All angels are men · Angels have no natural outlet for their sexual urges · There are lots and lots of angels, with lots and lots of time With this logic in mind, we can deduce that heaven must be like a huge prison shower room. I suppose that there are some people who have always had this concept of heaven, or at least hoped for it, but you will have to admit that this is not the mainstream viewpoint. If it were, the Cistine Chapel would be restricted to adults only. I think it’s safe to say that this exercise illustrates just how ridiculous is the story of the flood. These conclusions, although absurd, are the natural outgrowth of the story, itself. In order for the events of the flood to get off the ground, this must be true. So, choose for yourself: either heaven is a massive San Francisco bath house, or the story of the flood is just another yarn. Update Subsequent to publishing this article, one of my loyal readers took me to task regarding the proper view of angelic sexuality. Here is how he explained it to me: The angels were able to observe humans. They saw humans, particularly the males, having a jolly good time engaging in sex. Therefore, they decided to get in on it - sort of as a detached experiment regarding what they were missing. Now, this explanation has a couple of problems with it. First of all, this is not what the text says. The text plainly says that they found women attractive while they were still in heaven. Also, if they weren’t all stuck on the idea of sex with women, some of them could have materialized as men, some as women, and they could have come to earth and boinked each other’s brains out. No harm done, and no need for a flood. Secondly, using this logic, there would be no reason for angels to take on human form. Based on my keen observations around the barnyard, bulls seem to enjoy sex every bit as much as humans, and considerably more frequently. If angels just wanted to go slumming, they would have been better off to join the cattle family. Now that I think about it, I would really like to hear this story retold with a bovine variation. Face it, people. If you believe in the story of the flood, there is just no getting around the idea of horny angels. When you get to heaven, don’t drop your harp.

It is so bad, we cannot avoid being fed information about US political news even when watching Canadian news outlets. I can't stand CNN, it has become something other than news, and Fox is not available here. The really annoying thing is Canadian news outlets have all tuned in to US news anyway. On channels such as CBC and CTV news we hear far more about US politics, vis Trump, than about Canadian politics. All gossip, opinion panels (with Canadian "experts" giving opinions on Trump, US, etc.) speculation about what the latest emails might hold, whether or not Trump will fire Mueller on Sunday, today a retrospective on alleged lies that Trump has told (like "I've done more than any previous president", or the one where he states that Obama had his phone wiretapped during the campaign) etc. etc. All the same baseless, speculative gossip that you might hear on CNN. I'd like to know what my own government has done today, but that information is very hard to find.

So they say she won by that many. There has been many stories of people who were able to vote twice in the election. Maybe Hillary got more than she deserved. Maybe it was Trump that received more votes than Hillary. Hey, you never know.

It must be hard to work your mind through the intricate justification of the above. Women dress to look sexy but not to be objects for sex. Yet women ARE objects of sex and desire. Our culture has decreed this and every aspect of how women dress is based upon enhancing their sexuality. Or do you presume that when a woman wears a short skirt, five inch heels and a tight top with cleavage the only person that is going to notice or look or be at all affected will be the one(s) she wants?

If voting made any real difference it would be banned as subversive action.

Two things. West Jerusalem is a different ball of wax from Jerusalem. Secondly, Russia and Israel have a complex relationship. For example, Israel has not followed the US line on Ukraine: http://www.pravdareport.com/news/world/asia/11-12-2017/139362-israel_crimea-0/ http://m.jpost.com/Features/Front-Lines/Can-Israel-be-neutral-on-Ukraine-349814 See the last line here: http://m.jpost.com/Diaspora/Honoring-of-antisemites-a-problem-says-Israels-ambassador-to-Ukraine-507995 There's been 'no media conniption fit' over this divide between close allies for some reason, although with Trump in charge Lord knows what US policy is now. The Iranians should be worried about their Russian friends.