December 13, 2013
Yes, Salon, Atheists Do Help the Poor

CJ Werleman wrote a piece for Alternet about how atheists should learn a lesson from Pope Francis when it comes to dealing with poverty — and since it slams atheists, Salon was eager to reprint it: When the Pope washes the feet of convicts while calling for greater efforts to lift up the world’s poor, he makes it possible to establish meaningful partnerships with other moral communities, secular and religious. Of course, when Francis speaks about the “idolatry of money” and “growing income inequality,” you know, the things Jesus spoke about, you can set your watch in waiting for someone on the Right to accuse him of being a Marxist. Hello, Rush Limbaugh. Atheists like to talk about building a better world, one that is absent of religiosity in the public square, but where is the atheist movement, as defined by the some 2,000 atheist groups and organizations in the U.S., when it comes to dealing with our third-world levels of poverty? Not only is the atheist movement absent on this issue, it is spending thousands of dollars on billboards that make atheists look like assholes, at the same time Catholicism is looking hip again. The Pope has changed the perception of the Church in the minds of millions while the atheist movement has been sucked into the Right’s fictitious “war on christmas.” I’ll give him that Pope Francis walks the walk on poverty, saying no to the Papal palace and making outreach to the poor and criticism of capitalism run amok an important part of his legacy. But what’s with trashing atheist groups for not dealing with the same issues? Read more

December 13, 2013
The Most Blasphemous Cards Against Humanity Cards Yet
December 13, 2013
‘Keep Saturn in Saturnalia’ Billboard Counters Christian Sign in New Jersey Town
December 13, 2013
5th Grader Excluded From Speech Contest Because His Essay Mentions the Harm Caused by Religion
December 13, 2013
If Atheists Made a Commercial for a Dating Website…
December 13, 2013
The Unbearable Whiteness of Being (Megyn Kelly): Jon Stewart Skewers Fox News’ Caucasian Persuasion
December 12, 2013
South Carolina Air Force Base Removes Nativity Scene
December 12, 2013
That Is Not What the Bible Says…
December 12, 2013
Tabula Reza: FOX’s Megyn Kelly Insists Jesus Was a White Guy; Reza Aslan Responds
December 12, 2013
A Creationist’s Desperate Attempt to Sound Like a Credible Scientist

I almost feel bad for Creationists. They try so hard to be credible but their explanations too often hit a wall of reality and they’re forced to find a way around it without sounding like crazy people. It never works, of course. Just take a look at this new “research” paper put out by Nathaniel T. Jeanson of the Institute for Creation Research. Jeanson is a Harvard Medical School graduate who seems to knows how evolution works… but actively denies its truth. What’s shocking is that he acknowledges the strength of evolution (with references to published scientific papers)… and then tosses in references to the Bible to make his paper worthless. The evolutionary model is so robust that it leads to predictions of molecular function. Under the assumptions of this model, species will grow more and more distant molecularly over time, unless some natural force constrains random variation. For proteins that have evolved differences rapidly, evolutionists predict that these proteins have fewer functional constraints than proteins which have evolved differences slowly (Futuyma 2009). … This conundrum intensifies when considering hierarchical sequence patterns. For example, different species of Drosophila are more genetically distant from one another (Drosophila 12 Genomes Consortium 2007) than humans and chimpanzees are from one another (again, debates over the precise sequence identity notwithstanding [Bergman and Tomkins 2012; The Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium 2005; Tomkins 2011; Tomkins 2013; Tomkins and Bergman 2012; Wood 2006a]). Yet, the Drosophila species likely share a common ancestor since they belong to the same biological family (Wood 2006a), whereas humans and chimpanzees clearly have separate ancestries (Genesis 1:26–28). Why would differences between the related species exceed differences between unrelated ones? Ah, yes. Genesis. That peer-reviewed publication cited by real scientists everywhere. Read more

error: Content is protected !!