THE ADVENTURES OF RAY COMFORT

Once in a life time there comes such a moron as Ray Comfort.  He takes the cake when it comes to dickhead comments and ass backwards logic.  

He is now called the banana man and his side kick is Kirk Cameron.  Both are so funny to watch.  Ray makes an interesting and "enlightening" statement and Kirk acts as if it's the most wonderful thing he has ever heard.

I had to do a blog on this guy even though it was 6 years ago, but... back in April 2006, a video hit YouTube that just about went viral.  It was a small virus that was easily cured but it did leave a lot of mouths agape and if you haven't seen it I highly recommend you doing so now.  Go one, I can wait...

This was basically debunked before it hit the intertubes and became a big joke in the sceptic and atheist spheres, and still is.  I'm not going to sit here and tell you this is the kind of crazy shit we, as critical thinkers, come across everyday, no, most of the time we are fighting against somewhat intelligent apologists that can kind of make sense and have at least done some minimal research.  I am going to say that as a Kiwi myself I am ashamed to share the same Nationality as Ray Comfort.

This video has been ridiculed so much that I need only add the following video...

At first it may seem like I'm muddying the Ray Comfort waters but I truly believe that he has had no problem doing that to himself.  This is not the first video that shows him doing what he does best which is making a big, fat fool of himself and I dare say it won't be the last - after all, he is still alive.  Here he is again talking about a cake can...

There are some obvious problems with his "there must be a creator" argument and that, in short, is God.  What, or whom, created God?  Like our man Ray says, there must be a creator.  He skipped the fact that it took billions of years of evolution for our species, Homo Sapiens Sapiens, to get to the point we were able to produce the machines that manipulated the materials we discovered which put us on the road to discovery to achieve such a simple yet complex thing as an aluminium can.  Ad nauseum. 

So why am I picking on Ray Comfort?  Obviously he is not the brightest crayon in the box and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to break his arguments down and thankfully there aren't many like him around.  The problem is this, some people believe what he is saying so he is, in effect, spreading misinformation to the already duped.  He is not the only fruit loop in the cereal box and no matter how few of them there are in the world they are here and they are like cockroaches; you kill one and another one takes it's place - shine a light on their arguments and they scurry away into the dark recesses of circular logic.  Here is another...

Chuck Missler is so full of shit and clearly does not understand evolution at all.  I believe, honestly, that he shaved his ass and is sitting on his face.

So back to Ray Comfort.  His topics are ridiculously non researched and so is one of the low hanging fruits that we can pick off quickly.  Here is the question you have been waiting for... so, what's the harm?  I don't have the time nor space to properly go into that question but someone does, visit What's The Harm by Tim Farley.  On this excellent website you will find story upon story of the harm this kind of teaching can do.  You can see more on Ray Comfort on YouTube if you just search his name, go on, do it!  You deserve a good laugh :)

I write this blog because it is a passion of mine to explore the myth of god and along the way even I learn some cool stuff but it takes a lot of time and energy to write this blog.  If you enjoy reading this blog please make a donation by clicking the DONATE button on the right so I can put more time into creating a better blog.

Thank you all
Justin

BLOGGERS BELIEF - DEREK OUELLETTE

The Bible is almost wholly (as apposed to Holy) nonscientific and nonsensical in it's story telling and that's not really surprising as when it was all put together there was little, if no, scientific method to speak of.  The only way teachers of the day could answer some of the more interesting questions was to tell stories, most of which were passed down from generation to generation before been put into book form - the Bible.  In the face of scientific discovery there are still those that ardently follow what the bible tells them and swallow it hook, line and sinker even after all the evidence is to the contrary.  That's the kind of lazy thinking I abhor but  we live and let live - or do we?  Some followers cause more harm than good.  Those that follow the myth and continue to support many antiquated laws created from simple stories in an ancient script should be torn down and ridiculed.  If you haven't already noticed we are living in the age of enlightenment where the scientific method and critical thinking will take us into the future.

So, I shall put my money where my mouth is but I thought I would start by picking some of the lower hanging fruit such as the author of this blog What I believe Genesis 1 teaches and why.

Derek Ouelette started out by saying he is not a scientist which is abundantly clear throughout this particular blog, he is, by all accounts, an apologist.  He says there is nothing inherently wrong with believing the world is only 6000 years old and there is nothing inherently wrong with believing in evolution but misses the fact that evolution is not something to believe in and is in no way to be put in the same belief structure of a young earth, you can't even put those two things in the same sentence but lets move on.
  Derek correctly points that the belief in God doesn't have to mean that you have to believe in creation and that the bible is not a historical document but a theological book about God.  I am of course paraphrasing as he also said the books of the bible were written at those times in history which is far from accurate so I'd give him a 5/10 for trying.
  He falls over the argument from authority with his "clincher" being Jesus and Paul spoke of Adam as if he was a real person but that's just another book in the Bible backing up the first book in the Bible - not a "clincher" I'm afraid.  Interestingly, Derek points out on more than one occasion that the bible is a testament to mans fallibility and there are some interesting wholes in the scriptures and the chronology does not line up.  This is apologetic, almost denial, when he eludes to the fact this is proof of gods character.  Ironic isn't it, the gaps in the bible is proof of God.  The creationists use the very same argument when pointing out gaps in the fossil records - proof of god.

I will give Derek credit for saying the scriptures do not tell us how long ago everything was created, let alone 6000 years ago, as the genealogical records cannot be used.  But then things go south for him.  He has fallen into the trap of "look at the artist, not the art", which he believes is the real message behind the bible.  That is one interpretation of the bible but there are many others.  His interpretation creates an argument from authority - in other words, god created everything because god said so.  Do not ask questions the bible can't answer, you just have to take it on blind faith that God created everything and that Noah and the flood did in fact happen even though there is no evidence to support it. 

I may be coming at this blog in the wrong way to what he had in mind and he did preface by saying he does not believe in evolution because there is no evidence of macroevolution, which is just ridiculous as there is no such thing as macroevolution, and because, in short, the bible says so.  The biggest mistake he has made is saying that:

   "evolution is losing credibility in many spheres – and say with a critical eye that I cannot accept that theory. "   

That is pure, whole cloth bullshit and in effect he has thrown out pretty much every piece of scientific evidence and discovery since the publication of the bible in favour of a book that is full of gaps.  He is using circular reasoning and telling the reader that if you're going to get all scientific about it then don't bother reading it.  Well I read it and I would like to challenge, from one non-scientific person to another, what are your reasons for not "believing" in the theory (read fact) of evolution and give me examples of the loss of credibility in any spheres.

His conclusion: take everything on faith and don't ask questions.


I write this blog because it is a passion of mine to explore the myth of god and along the way even I learn some cool stuff but it takes a lot of time and energy to write this blog.  If you enjoy reading this blog please make a donation by clicking the DONATE button on the right so I can put more time into creating a better blog.

Thank you all
Justin