“Mors dei,” translated, “The Death of God.” This is the title of a blog whose author pingbacked a post on my co-author’s site, “Intelligent Design and More.” Here’s a quote from this pingback:
Yay, he can google-translate Latin. Unfortunately, if you notice the “dei” was in lower case, you would realize that it was not a proper name, hence not “God” but “god.” He goes on to quote one of my posts. In any event, let’s have some fun with his statements, shall we?
For those unfamiliar with this particular “SUB-species” of homo-sapiens-sapiens (I may be wrong with this term for modern man, since naturalistic science is always changing its terminology and theories to suit its needs), or “Atheisticus Naturalisticus,” this is their preferred form of communication, especially with those who don’t adhere to their pseudo-scientific, religious doctrines. This is as far as I will go with their brand of communicating, but I just couldn’t resist!
Actually, I found this rather funny, perhaps for a different reason, I rather like the idea of being considered a separate subspecies, unfortunately, we are not isolated from one another, nor are we different genetically or physiologically to any significant degree. I also rather like the straw man “theory” definition used here. It indicates the level of pseudophilosophical hoops one must jump through to be a creationist.
Edit: Another reason why this is funny is that Mr. All-beliefs-are-religions thinks by simply calling something pseudo-scientific, it makes it pseudoscientific. How, exactly, can science, done by scientists, with no flaws in the methods, logic, or results, be pseudoscientific?
I guess I just don’t understand this author’s angst, even though he thinks he has explained it away. After all, he and his fellow atheistic scientists have control of our government, tax dollars and education system, so why is he so angry, confrontational and just downright nasty? He and his buddies have successfully brainwashed most of my generation (baby boomers), as well as those following, with their ever-changing theories on the earth, universe and creation. He and his kind seemingly have us, “CREtards,” right where they want us, so why don’t they just back-off and leave us to our “superstitious and ignorant” beliefs? There must be something else troubling this person and his friends.
I already explained this in a comment, to quote myself:
2) You continue to say “we’ve won” with regards to the school system, tax dollars, etc. Perhaps you should read about the current issue with the Texas Board of Education, the same is going on in Ohio, with the Conejo school board, and Brunswick North Carolina.
I’ll add to that with what I wanted to say in the comment, which was growing far too long. In addition, countless tax dollars go to religious organizations which spend some of that money on proselytizing. Additionally, most religious organizations are tax exempt, meaning of the billions of income they receive annually, not one penny goes to support the country which then turns around and hands money to them for “religious services.” My problem is not with charities which assist the poor and homeless, these should indeed be tax exempt. My problem is with things such as the money which goes to religious leaders is used to help spread their beliefs with tax dollars.
Could it be that his angst is coming from a dark and insecure portion of his “evolved” being? Could it be that he is incapable of fully resting in his scientific evidence and theories? Could it be that what he struggles against is trying to reveal the truth to him?
Who knows? I do know, however, that the theories have been tested time and again, revised to include additional phenomenon observed. As such, One such example is horizontal gene transfer. These are not “problems” as are frequently concluded, but areas for expansion. For the sake of clarity, horizontal gene transfer is not the norm, but the exception. It is more frequent in viruses and bacteria than in vertebrates because if we have a single cell which experiences horizontal gene transfer, unless it is in a germ cell line, those traits will not be passed on to future generations. Evolution does happen. It has been observed. The germ theory of disease is likewise supported fairly well. The reason theories can undergo change to incorporate new evidence is NOT a weakness, but a strength. The inflexibility of religious doctrines demonstrates how much evidence must be ignored for the doctrines to be true. T.H. Huxley famously (or was it infamously?) wrote in Has a Frog a Soul? that similar effects are seen in humans and frogs when the same distal nerves are severed.
This is something that he will have to figure out for himself. I can’t do it for him, nor can any other “CREtard.”
Perhaps you should examine your own beliefs, my ideas are constantly under scrutiny from myself and others. I intentionally put them there so as to allow my grasp of reality to be strengthened.
On a further note, I’d like to elaborate on a common equivocation that “atheism” is a religion. Here are definitions of “religion:
Religion: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny
Religion: an institution to express belief in a divine power
Religion: a set of attitudes, beliefs, and practices pertaining to supernatural power
Religion: A sincerely held set of beliefs, values and attitudes; beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature and worship of a Supreme Being, supernatural force or god(s)
In the event you do not see the common link, you should probably see an optometrist. In none of these instances is “atheism” defined in this way. Or, a better way of explaining it, “atheism is to religion as bald is to hair color.”