" In March the unemployment rate fell to 8.7% even though 158,000 jobs were lost and 143,000 jobs were created."
That is a quote from my last post making fun of the math used to determine the unemployment rate. i was trying to point out that when you have more new unemployed people than you do new jobs in a given month then you have MORE unemployed people, and yet the government says the rate comes down. Because they think that we are STUPID.
So, i'm wrong right? Sorry, no, i'm right. Here's the actual quote from the jobs report, "The government says applications for unemployment benefits rose 27,000 to a seasonally adjusted 412,000 for the week ended April 9. That left applications at their highest point since mid-February." So that's really bad right? Unless companies hired more than 412,000 people the unemployment rate went up, and that would prove that the recession was continuing unabated. here's the rest of the report, "Companies added more than 200,000 jobs in March for the second straight month, the first time that has happened since 2006. The unemployment rate fell to a two-year low of 8.8 percent and has dropped a full percentage point since November." Do you see what they did there? 412,000 new applications for unemployment and 200,000 new jobs means that there are nearly a quarter of a million more unemployed people that the 1st of March! It does not mean that there are less unemployed people!!!!! 200,000 - 412,000 = BAD
In other news you have been betrayed by your leaders ....... AGAIN! The budget deal is a total con-job, there are no real cuts to spending, a little "enron math" here and some fuzzy rounding there and a pinch of salt and then bake the whole thing for two weeks in the heat created by threatening to shut down the government and what do you have .... the same crap you had before. Awesome. These guys are seriously just crack addicts, but their crack is spending money on non-sense. I told you that voting them out wouldn't work because it's being voted in that makes them this way, you didn't believe me, but here we are, same ol same ol, no end in sight.
Unemployment answers. Everyone wants to know what is going to fix unemployment, and there are all kinds of false claims and bad economic theory floating around out there. Republicans say that if you don't tax rich people and corporations that they will run out and hire millions of people at great salaries and with great benefits. Democrats say that if you raise taxes on rich people and corporations and give that money to people who do not work for it that somehow jobs will magically appear ... oh, wait i remember, the people will spend the money at walmart and then walmart will need new cashiers. Except if you've been to walmart then you know that it does not induce them to hire when they see 40 people in line at one open cash register ... i think they think it's fun.
So what is the answer? Well, there isn't one answer that works all the time. Wars sure help, but not the kind of war we're fighting now, to fix unemployment with a war you need tons on increased military factory work and in order to sustain the employment rate after the war ends you need lots of soldiers to die. I am not advocating that. I love our soldiers, but that was a big part of the post WWII economic boom in the middle class, a reduced labor force drove up wages, it's a simple supply and demand curve, pure 8th grade economics. If there are a total of 10 jobs in the entire economy and there are 30 applicants, the 10 people hired will not be paid well, and if they don't like it they can be replaced by one of the other 20. If there are only 8 applicants for the same 10 jobs then the picture is different, companies are then competing for the available workers and wages and benefits will be higher. Make sense? I hope so. Which brings me to my solution to the current unemployment problem. I maintain that it is not in fact an unemployment problem, it is instead a reduced household income problem. The problem is not lack of jobs, the problem is that people can't pay their bills due to income reductions and the obvious inflation that the government keeps denying. In most households you have two people competing in an over saturated labor market separately, each one being low balled by their employer. So here's the fix. I need about 50 million people to resign from their jobs. I know that sounds crazy, but the sudden creation of massive numbers of job openings will create a hiring may-lay that will result in people being offered huge salaries and great benefits. So if you are currently married to someone who has been unemployed for 2 years and you have been supporting him, you get to be part of the 50 million and he will get a job that pays as much as you used to make combined. No new jobs, but your finances will be as healthy as ever. The real dirty secret of all the talks in Washington is that you cannot "create" jobs. Demand created jobs, demand for products and services. A restrictive tariff might created jobs, stimulus will not. I know that in the current climate it is the height of misogynistic rhetoric to even suggest it, but if we were a nation where the majority of people only were married one time, and one of those people excluded themselves from the work force, i maintain that we would have no economic crisis. Demand would be less and less production would be required. That all people are entering the work force is driving down the price of labor on the market and at the same time driving up the price of all other commodities. So, there, i said it. The solution to our dilemma is single income families with a stay at home parent ... a return to the way it used to be. A return to the old way, stores closed on Sunday, hands on parenting ... first you just have to realize that toughening up women, emasculating men, having cool gadgets, allowing a generation of children to be raised by day care providers and completely withdrawing from your community into your house, into the digital world, none of it is actually progress. They told you it was progress so that you would consume more ... what could sell cars like getting women to go to work? Gas? Mac and Cheese? It's not progress, and the truth is just beneath the surface of all of our problems ... it's the great leap backwards.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Friday, April 8, 2011
Reid, Boehner, Obama ... Get a clue!
Ok, so I didn’t really want to get involved in this because I think I would have to write a book to really explain it all and there have been quite a few complaints that my last couple of blog posts were too long and people were falling asleep while reading them. This becomes a huge problem when you factor in that 12% of pinkosworld readers read while driving and then they fall asleep and crash. I know that you’re wondering how we know that ... we just do, OK?
This week’s post is brought to you by Speciation ...the study of species separated for long periods of time, subjected to vastly different environmental conditions, then brought back together where they do not mate and then some scientists declare them different species and pat themselves on the back for proving evolutionary theory. Which has absolutely nothing to do with the Federal Budget ... unless the government is funding the experiments, which they probably are, so it’s not as bad of a segue as had hoped for, but I hope you’ll agree that it was pretty bad.
Ahhh, the Federal Budget. Let me just say this, I researched this post for one hour (not as long as a normal news post, but I have been really sick and there is so much information out there that I could write ten posts from what I learned in that hour) so in no way does this paint a full picture of what the government spends money on, but my hope is that it is shocking enough to make you really, really angry. I did not get into Social Security or Medicare, I know that that is where most of the money goes, but like I said, I’ve been sick and ... whatever, if you want me to solve those two somebody is going to have to start sending me a paycheck, suffice to say we spend a lot of money on the elderly, we loooove the elderly. $1.6 trillion love.
Here are some of the obsurdities I uncovered in 60 minutes of really hard work, there is a Bureau of the Public Debt ... and they’re on twitter. So that’s reassuring, along with the Office of Thrift Supervision ... wow.
The Department of Education gets $92.9 Billion per year spends $15 billion on “Accelerating Achievement and Insuring Equity” $393 million on “Supporting Student Success” which seem to cover some of the same areas to me and then I have to wonder how effective they are, how much over lap they have, do they both have an administrator and a staff? Oh, and did you know that we spend $234 million per year to fund Howard University? A private college. It doesn’t say why, I suppose it has something to do with historical prejudice at universities, but I went to college and didn’t see much of that still going on. I could be wrong. $234 million? Wow. They spent $750 million to fund “English Learner Education”. Is that ESL? Does the government really spend 3/4 billion dollars to teach people English? Not to brag, but I learned German for the cost of a plane ticket, and a year’s time, but I assume that the beneficiaries of this program are already here, so what’s the money for? They need to go out and mingle a bit. And let us not forget the $1.76 billion for “Salaries and Expenses”. Wow. Double wow. Does that mean that the salaries of the people teaching English in the “English Learner Program” aren’t included in their number?
The Department of Energy gets $30 billion and either don’t publish their budget (required by law?) Or they make it really hard to find.
Here we go with the Department of Labor did you know that your tax dollars insure the pensions of private workers? Seriously, if a pension fund goes broke from mismanagement or graft or whatever the reason, you’re backing it up. The “Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation” gets $7.2 billion per year and spent $2.8 million on supplies and materials and another $8.3 million on equipment. Seriously. $10 million on paper and staplers and laptops and photocopiers and dividers. Wow. There’s a law, you may have heard of it, the Family Medical Leave Act, in case not it basically says that for certain reasons you can leave your job and it must be there for you when you return, which I have always been in favor of because the worker who left would not be paid in their absence which insures as short a leave as is necessary. Not for long, the 2012 DOL budget proposes $23 million for “State paid Leave Fund”. If states want to pay people out on leave, people protected by FMLA, the feds are going to help pick up the tab. That’ll go great, no one is going to abuse that bit of genius. I could never afford paternity leave when my first three children were born, but if you’re going to pay me to hang out with my family for 6 months or so I might seriously consider having some more kids. You know the people who lie every month about unemployment? You know how they say it’s going down because the work force is shrinking (translation-if you’ve been unemployed too long we don’t want to count you anymore so you don’t exist) they get some money too, $655 million for the Office of Labor Statistics. Seriously. I will save the government $654 million dollars and make up some phoney numbers at my kitchen table, I’ll start right now. In March the unemployment rate fell to 8.7% even though 158,000 jobs were lost and 143,000 jobs were created. Where’s my million? But all that waste explains why there is only $ 48 million left over for Veterans Employment and Training. They don’t really need that do they? The Army recruiter said that you would learn something that would be great for you once you got out of the Army, who needs training? Oh, there’s no position open for someone who is exceptional at recognizing enemy combatants in an urban setting? Accuracy with a rifle? Avoiding IED’s? Calling in air strike coordinates? Oh ... sorry, we spent all the real money making up some numbers that help no one, so you’ll have to go work at McDonalds, or you could ... stay in the Army and go back to war.
And I really tried, but I can’t Find Heath and Human Services Budget, which is cool, they only get $854 billion ...no biggie. I will say this, from spending far too much time searching their web site for some answers, the Secretary of HHS, Kathleen Sebelius, really loves herself. Check it out, there’s a whole lot of Kathy on www.hhs.gov.
With all of this I’m just trying to show you that government spending is stupid. There is no oversight, no one is watching to make sure that 15 people aren’t doing the same job ... no one asks, “Is this necessary?” or “Is this the government’s job?”. It’s just yee haw! Let’s do some spendin’!
So as the powers that be sit around Obama’s office and argue about a couple of billion dollars for the rest of the year and hang the pay of the bravest men and wonmen on planet earth in the balance ... I just want to say to them that I am ashamed of each and every one of them. I am ashamed that our nation is run by people who do not care one bit about the American people, I am ashamed that my President has sent my brothers and sisters to fight and die in the four corners of earth without first making sure that their families would be taken care of back home, I am ashamed that the argument is about cutting a few dollars. Do they not see? I spent ONE HOUR analyzing their budget and have found exactly what I thought I would find. Washington spends our money in ways that none of us ever would, Washington passes spending bills with out forethought or afterthought, just vote “yea” and go home. Most of all I am ashamed that they have been able to pacify all of us and do it in front of our faces. Tonight I pray that all of the people serving this nation do not have to worry if their children have food on the table back home, that the leaders of out nation would get this one thing right, and I pray that these same leaders will be inspired not to change the amount they spend, but the entire way they govern.
I hope it was short enough, and you 12% ers need to wait until you get home to read ... or at least until you get to a red light. Happy Friday!
This week’s post is brought to you by Speciation ...the study of species separated for long periods of time, subjected to vastly different environmental conditions, then brought back together where they do not mate and then some scientists declare them different species and pat themselves on the back for proving evolutionary theory. Which has absolutely nothing to do with the Federal Budget ... unless the government is funding the experiments, which they probably are, so it’s not as bad of a segue as had hoped for, but I hope you’ll agree that it was pretty bad.
Ahhh, the Federal Budget. Let me just say this, I researched this post for one hour (not as long as a normal news post, but I have been really sick and there is so much information out there that I could write ten posts from what I learned in that hour) so in no way does this paint a full picture of what the government spends money on, but my hope is that it is shocking enough to make you really, really angry. I did not get into Social Security or Medicare, I know that that is where most of the money goes, but like I said, I’ve been sick and ... whatever, if you want me to solve those two somebody is going to have to start sending me a paycheck, suffice to say we spend a lot of money on the elderly, we loooove the elderly. $1.6 trillion love.
Here are some of the obsurdities I uncovered in 60 minutes of really hard work, there is a Bureau of the Public Debt ... and they’re on twitter. So that’s reassuring, along with the Office of Thrift Supervision ... wow.
The Department of Education gets $92.9 Billion per year spends $15 billion on “Accelerating Achievement and Insuring Equity” $393 million on “Supporting Student Success” which seem to cover some of the same areas to me and then I have to wonder how effective they are, how much over lap they have, do they both have an administrator and a staff? Oh, and did you know that we spend $234 million per year to fund Howard University? A private college. It doesn’t say why, I suppose it has something to do with historical prejudice at universities, but I went to college and didn’t see much of that still going on. I could be wrong. $234 million? Wow. They spent $750 million to fund “English Learner Education”. Is that ESL? Does the government really spend 3/4 billion dollars to teach people English? Not to brag, but I learned German for the cost of a plane ticket, and a year’s time, but I assume that the beneficiaries of this program are already here, so what’s the money for? They need to go out and mingle a bit. And let us not forget the $1.76 billion for “Salaries and Expenses”. Wow. Double wow. Does that mean that the salaries of the people teaching English in the “English Learner Program” aren’t included in their number?
The Department of Energy gets $30 billion and either don’t publish their budget (required by law?) Or they make it really hard to find.
Here we go with the Department of Labor did you know that your tax dollars insure the pensions of private workers? Seriously, if a pension fund goes broke from mismanagement or graft or whatever the reason, you’re backing it up. The “Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation” gets $7.2 billion per year and spent $2.8 million on supplies and materials and another $8.3 million on equipment. Seriously. $10 million on paper and staplers and laptops and photocopiers and dividers. Wow. There’s a law, you may have heard of it, the Family Medical Leave Act, in case not it basically says that for certain reasons you can leave your job and it must be there for you when you return, which I have always been in favor of because the worker who left would not be paid in their absence which insures as short a leave as is necessary. Not for long, the 2012 DOL budget proposes $23 million for “State paid Leave Fund”. If states want to pay people out on leave, people protected by FMLA, the feds are going to help pick up the tab. That’ll go great, no one is going to abuse that bit of genius. I could never afford paternity leave when my first three children were born, but if you’re going to pay me to hang out with my family for 6 months or so I might seriously consider having some more kids. You know the people who lie every month about unemployment? You know how they say it’s going down because the work force is shrinking (translation-if you’ve been unemployed too long we don’t want to count you anymore so you don’t exist) they get some money too, $655 million for the Office of Labor Statistics. Seriously. I will save the government $654 million dollars and make up some phoney numbers at my kitchen table, I’ll start right now. In March the unemployment rate fell to 8.7% even though 158,000 jobs were lost and 143,000 jobs were created. Where’s my million? But all that waste explains why there is only $ 48 million left over for Veterans Employment and Training. They don’t really need that do they? The Army recruiter said that you would learn something that would be great for you once you got out of the Army, who needs training? Oh, there’s no position open for someone who is exceptional at recognizing enemy combatants in an urban setting? Accuracy with a rifle? Avoiding IED’s? Calling in air strike coordinates? Oh ... sorry, we spent all the real money making up some numbers that help no one, so you’ll have to go work at McDonalds, or you could ... stay in the Army and go back to war.
And I really tried, but I can’t Find Heath and Human Services Budget, which is cool, they only get $854 billion ...no biggie. I will say this, from spending far too much time searching their web site for some answers, the Secretary of HHS, Kathleen Sebelius, really loves herself. Check it out, there’s a whole lot of Kathy on www.hhs.gov.
With all of this I’m just trying to show you that government spending is stupid. There is no oversight, no one is watching to make sure that 15 people aren’t doing the same job ... no one asks, “Is this necessary?” or “Is this the government’s job?”. It’s just yee haw! Let’s do some spendin’!
So as the powers that be sit around Obama’s office and argue about a couple of billion dollars for the rest of the year and hang the pay of the bravest men and wonmen on planet earth in the balance ... I just want to say to them that I am ashamed of each and every one of them. I am ashamed that our nation is run by people who do not care one bit about the American people, I am ashamed that my President has sent my brothers and sisters to fight and die in the four corners of earth without first making sure that their families would be taken care of back home, I am ashamed that the argument is about cutting a few dollars. Do they not see? I spent ONE HOUR analyzing their budget and have found exactly what I thought I would find. Washington spends our money in ways that none of us ever would, Washington passes spending bills with out forethought or afterthought, just vote “yea” and go home. Most of all I am ashamed that they have been able to pacify all of us and do it in front of our faces. Tonight I pray that all of the people serving this nation do not have to worry if their children have food on the table back home, that the leaders of out nation would get this one thing right, and I pray that these same leaders will be inspired not to change the amount they spend, but the entire way they govern.
I hope it was short enough, and you 12% ers need to wait until you get home to read ... or at least until you get to a red light. Happy Friday!
Sunday, April 3, 2011
A moment away from politics
Darwinism, once banned from public schools in this country, is now accepted as fact. Secular academia is arrogant and pompous and in their effort to be all knowing and a pillar of knowledge they have hitched their wagon to Darwin’s theory and are letting it run. In the early days it was considered blasphemy, then it was debated and then somewhere along the way it has been introduced as the new creation-ism (no evidence, but must be believed), and it requires a whole bunch of faith to believe in evolution.
I do not believe that it is blasphemy to study and ask questions about how the earth functions and how it came to be as it is, I’m not even going to go so far as to say that my opinion is correct (obviously I think that it is), but certainly all you scientists and amateur scholars of atheism could come up with something better in the past 150 years, couldn’t you?
First we must, as in all things, question the source. Where does the information disseminate from and what to the vocal supporters have to gain from spreading their theories as fact. In some cases it is money, if you are looking for grant money and donations to find “the missing link” it sure helps if the whole world believes that there is something to find. If Darwinism is a fact then there must be, it becomes a simple problem of finding it. In other cases there is an alterior motive. Godlessness. If you want the world to reject God, to move forward past “silly superstition” them you have to replace creation and God Himself with something. Evolution and science slide in to some pretty big shoes and if they are presented at the right angle, they appear to fill them, but they don’t.
Before you get all excited and have to breathe into a paper bag let me explain something, natural selection (the basis of Darwin’s theory) exists and it does cause slow and dramatic changes within species. This makes sense and is used as the jumping off point for the rest of the nonsense. If there is a population of giraffes with varying neck lengths and they suffer from environmental hardships in the form of a food shortage, in the ensuing years this giraffe population eats everything with in reach of their little mouths, it stands to reason that eventually only the longest necked giraffes will get to eat and therefore be strong enough to procreate and if these conditions continue long enough the short necked giraffes will be bred into non existence. Not extinction, and this is an important distinction, they were all giraffes and their physical appearance has changed, but they are still giraffes. Natural selection like this can be caused by a variety of circumstances, slow cheetah eventually cannot catch enough food to survive and do not reproduce, dark colored polar bear can not stalk their prey, tuskless elephants cannot defend themselves sufficiently (this one actually is playing itself out in reverse as you read this. Poachers have decimated the tusked African elephant population and the offspring of the remaining elephants are being born without tusks) and on and on and on. For every imaginable external stress an organism can be put under there seems to be a universal ability to rise up and meet the challenge, to adapt and continue. This is the universally undisputed portion of Darwin’s work ... and from there the proponents of evolution ask you to make one heck of a leap. The odd thing is that it may not sound crazy to you, there was a time when it made perfect sense to me, it was what I had been taught and I never really thought about it. The leap is from adaptation to evolution. From species slowly changing better meet the challenges that a population faces thru selective breeding to species actually becoming different species. You have evolved from monkeys, your salamander evolved from dinosaurs, or is it prehistoric fish? I’m not really sure which ... and neither are they. They talk about “the missing link” and what that is is the blended human, an organism that is more human that neanderthal man but less human that you are. Finding this organism would prove their theory correct, not that they need to prove it at this point, it is being taught in every educational institution on planet earth as gospel. What they fail to mention, the dirty omitted little secret is that they haven’t found the missing link for any current organism. When you begin to really think about all the verifiable facts that are presented there are huge gaping holes in all of it. The dinosaurs suffered a massive extinction and they also evolved ... huh? Did they die off or did they evolve into something else? I know that a really smart Darwinist will say both, some dinosaurs died off and some evolved into ... something else. It wasn’t just dinosaurs that died off, it was everything, plants, fish, birds ... and they all evolved? Really? At its core, the idea that life began in the ocean and thru millions of years of environmental stress developed the ability to breathe air and grew legs is asinine! To suggest that it was some sort of crazy accident of probability is just reaching for anything to fit the theory, a desperate attempt to tie up the loose ends, to drown out opposing view points. It is very difficult to perform a population study of a million generations to see what anomalies might present themselves. But I will say this, if legs and breathing air are just a silly accident, in order for things to be as they are today you would need billions of silly accidents. Live birth of mammals is a sticky one, a female of a species would simultaneously have to accidently carry its offspring to full term and also accidently develop the ability to produce milk. That’s a tough one, it would have to be a single organism ... not gradual. Any species with unusual fertilization processes would require a male and a female to have the same billion to one accident simultaneously, for example the red velvet mite, which is as big as one of the letters in this sentence, has a peculiar mating habit. The male releases its sperms on small twigs or stalks in what scientists call the "love garden", then lays down an intricate silken trail to the spot. When a female stumbles upon this trail, she will follow it to seek out the "artist". If she likes his work, then she will sit on the sperm. However, if another male spots the garden, he will trash it and lay his own instead! Did they have a meeting and decide that from now on this would be the new way? The un-leap-able hurdle of evolutionary theory is that one species cannot become another species, sure there are changes over time, but a giraffe is still a giraffe ... and will never become a hippopotamus. Even if we wait a billion years.
So, if a fish cannot become a land walking, air breathing mammal/bird/reptile/insect then of course an amoeba cannot become a fish. And that kills Darwin. The book he wrote, his life’s work was entitled “Origin of the Species” and that is what he was theorizing, he used his extensive study of slight changes in populations over time and the idea of natural selection and he made the leap that human beings used to be monkeys and then of course that monkeys used to be something before that and that thing used to be something else and you can continue to traced it all back to the oldest fossils ever found which are single celled organisms. And that was the beginning.
That a single celled organism could evolved in to the immeasurably diverse ecosystem doesn’t seem strange to you? That organism evolved chlorophyll and became a plant and also evolved a brain and muscles and bones and became you and also evolved an exoskeleton and became a butterfly?
Which gets us to the biggest hole of all, don’t ask a Darwinist for the answer to this one, because you will either get a response so stupid that you will get a headache or they will tell you that their theory that explains everything that has ever happened with every creature on the entire planet for all of history, hasn’t found the answer yet. Where did the single celled organism come from? It’s the old chicken and the egg dilemma ... the two most common explanations of Darwinists are these, lightning struck “ooze” and thus formed the ooze into a simple lifeform, or that life was introduced to the planet by extraterrestrial means. Lightning? Struck the ooze? And formed a cell wall, a nucleus and digestive capabilities? Really? I’ve never seen lightning build anything before, or even organize it ... that’s a good one.
I’m not even going to get into Mr Dawkins extraterrestrial nonsense. But I will say this, if the origin of life on earth is life on another planet you have not dodged a bullet, you still have to explain the life on the other planet. Maybe there is more constructive lighting on that planet.
I propose this to you, I know it is old fashioned, and considered the height of ancient ignorance, but I propose it anyway. God created the universe, the earth, everything on it and He did so intentionally. The bombardier beetle is not an accident ... “The spray is produced within a pair of chambers in the beetle’s abdomen. One of these chambers contains hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone. The other chamber contains two enzymes called catalase and peroxidase. If another insect threatens the bombardier beetle, the beetle will respond by mixing the two chemicals. The enzymes cause the hydrogen peroxide to decompose into water and oxygen. This chemical reaction releases heat, which raises the fluid and gas inside the chamber to 100 degrees Celsius - in other words, boiling. The boiling temperature causes the oxygen gas to expand. The expanding gas forces the fluid out at the offending predator.” Really? An insect developed the ability to create chemicals inside of its body and also developed the physiology to store them, mix them and then excrete them thru a series of happy little accidents?
I see the Creator’s hand everywhere I look at the natural world, the balance of ecosystems in a world ruled by entropy, the perfect beauty of countless creatures, the immeasurable usefulness of the most unexpected actors. Maybe you don’t see it how I do, maybe the Creator is not obvious to you, and that’s fine with me, I don’t even consider it blasphemy ... but for God’s sake come up with something better that Darwinism, come up with a theory that explains something, anything, God knows that Darwin didn’t.
I do not believe that it is blasphemy to study and ask questions about how the earth functions and how it came to be as it is, I’m not even going to go so far as to say that my opinion is correct (obviously I think that it is), but certainly all you scientists and amateur scholars of atheism could come up with something better in the past 150 years, couldn’t you?
First we must, as in all things, question the source. Where does the information disseminate from and what to the vocal supporters have to gain from spreading their theories as fact. In some cases it is money, if you are looking for grant money and donations to find “the missing link” it sure helps if the whole world believes that there is something to find. If Darwinism is a fact then there must be, it becomes a simple problem of finding it. In other cases there is an alterior motive. Godlessness. If you want the world to reject God, to move forward past “silly superstition” them you have to replace creation and God Himself with something. Evolution and science slide in to some pretty big shoes and if they are presented at the right angle, they appear to fill them, but they don’t.
Before you get all excited and have to breathe into a paper bag let me explain something, natural selection (the basis of Darwin’s theory) exists and it does cause slow and dramatic changes within species. This makes sense and is used as the jumping off point for the rest of the nonsense. If there is a population of giraffes with varying neck lengths and they suffer from environmental hardships in the form of a food shortage, in the ensuing years this giraffe population eats everything with in reach of their little mouths, it stands to reason that eventually only the longest necked giraffes will get to eat and therefore be strong enough to procreate and if these conditions continue long enough the short necked giraffes will be bred into non existence. Not extinction, and this is an important distinction, they were all giraffes and their physical appearance has changed, but they are still giraffes. Natural selection like this can be caused by a variety of circumstances, slow cheetah eventually cannot catch enough food to survive and do not reproduce, dark colored polar bear can not stalk their prey, tuskless elephants cannot defend themselves sufficiently (this one actually is playing itself out in reverse as you read this. Poachers have decimated the tusked African elephant population and the offspring of the remaining elephants are being born without tusks) and on and on and on. For every imaginable external stress an organism can be put under there seems to be a universal ability to rise up and meet the challenge, to adapt and continue. This is the universally undisputed portion of Darwin’s work ... and from there the proponents of evolution ask you to make one heck of a leap. The odd thing is that it may not sound crazy to you, there was a time when it made perfect sense to me, it was what I had been taught and I never really thought about it. The leap is from adaptation to evolution. From species slowly changing better meet the challenges that a population faces thru selective breeding to species actually becoming different species. You have evolved from monkeys, your salamander evolved from dinosaurs, or is it prehistoric fish? I’m not really sure which ... and neither are they. They talk about “the missing link” and what that is is the blended human, an organism that is more human that neanderthal man but less human that you are. Finding this organism would prove their theory correct, not that they need to prove it at this point, it is being taught in every educational institution on planet earth as gospel. What they fail to mention, the dirty omitted little secret is that they haven’t found the missing link for any current organism. When you begin to really think about all the verifiable facts that are presented there are huge gaping holes in all of it. The dinosaurs suffered a massive extinction and they also evolved ... huh? Did they die off or did they evolve into something else? I know that a really smart Darwinist will say both, some dinosaurs died off and some evolved into ... something else. It wasn’t just dinosaurs that died off, it was everything, plants, fish, birds ... and they all evolved? Really? At its core, the idea that life began in the ocean and thru millions of years of environmental stress developed the ability to breathe air and grew legs is asinine! To suggest that it was some sort of crazy accident of probability is just reaching for anything to fit the theory, a desperate attempt to tie up the loose ends, to drown out opposing view points. It is very difficult to perform a population study of a million generations to see what anomalies might present themselves. But I will say this, if legs and breathing air are just a silly accident, in order for things to be as they are today you would need billions of silly accidents. Live birth of mammals is a sticky one, a female of a species would simultaneously have to accidently carry its offspring to full term and also accidently develop the ability to produce milk. That’s a tough one, it would have to be a single organism ... not gradual. Any species with unusual fertilization processes would require a male and a female to have the same billion to one accident simultaneously, for example the red velvet mite, which is as big as one of the letters in this sentence, has a peculiar mating habit. The male releases its sperms on small twigs or stalks in what scientists call the "love garden", then lays down an intricate silken trail to the spot. When a female stumbles upon this trail, she will follow it to seek out the "artist". If she likes his work, then she will sit on the sperm. However, if another male spots the garden, he will trash it and lay his own instead! Did they have a meeting and decide that from now on this would be the new way? The un-leap-able hurdle of evolutionary theory is that one species cannot become another species, sure there are changes over time, but a giraffe is still a giraffe ... and will never become a hippopotamus. Even if we wait a billion years.
So, if a fish cannot become a land walking, air breathing mammal/bird/reptile/insect then of course an amoeba cannot become a fish. And that kills Darwin. The book he wrote, his life’s work was entitled “Origin of the Species” and that is what he was theorizing, he used his extensive study of slight changes in populations over time and the idea of natural selection and he made the leap that human beings used to be monkeys and then of course that monkeys used to be something before that and that thing used to be something else and you can continue to traced it all back to the oldest fossils ever found which are single celled organisms. And that was the beginning.
That a single celled organism could evolved in to the immeasurably diverse ecosystem doesn’t seem strange to you? That organism evolved chlorophyll and became a plant and also evolved a brain and muscles and bones and became you and also evolved an exoskeleton and became a butterfly?
Which gets us to the biggest hole of all, don’t ask a Darwinist for the answer to this one, because you will either get a response so stupid that you will get a headache or they will tell you that their theory that explains everything that has ever happened with every creature on the entire planet for all of history, hasn’t found the answer yet. Where did the single celled organism come from? It’s the old chicken and the egg dilemma ... the two most common explanations of Darwinists are these, lightning struck “ooze” and thus formed the ooze into a simple lifeform, or that life was introduced to the planet by extraterrestrial means. Lightning? Struck the ooze? And formed a cell wall, a nucleus and digestive capabilities? Really? I’ve never seen lightning build anything before, or even organize it ... that’s a good one.
I’m not even going to get into Mr Dawkins extraterrestrial nonsense. But I will say this, if the origin of life on earth is life on another planet you have not dodged a bullet, you still have to explain the life on the other planet. Maybe there is more constructive lighting on that planet.
I propose this to you, I know it is old fashioned, and considered the height of ancient ignorance, but I propose it anyway. God created the universe, the earth, everything on it and He did so intentionally. The bombardier beetle is not an accident ... “The spray is produced within a pair of chambers in the beetle’s abdomen. One of these chambers contains hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone. The other chamber contains two enzymes called catalase and peroxidase. If another insect threatens the bombardier beetle, the beetle will respond by mixing the two chemicals. The enzymes cause the hydrogen peroxide to decompose into water and oxygen. This chemical reaction releases heat, which raises the fluid and gas inside the chamber to 100 degrees Celsius - in other words, boiling. The boiling temperature causes the oxygen gas to expand. The expanding gas forces the fluid out at the offending predator.” Really? An insect developed the ability to create chemicals inside of its body and also developed the physiology to store them, mix them and then excrete them thru a series of happy little accidents?
I see the Creator’s hand everywhere I look at the natural world, the balance of ecosystems in a world ruled by entropy, the perfect beauty of countless creatures, the immeasurable usefulness of the most unexpected actors. Maybe you don’t see it how I do, maybe the Creator is not obvious to you, and that’s fine with me, I don’t even consider it blasphemy ... but for God’s sake come up with something better that Darwinism, come up with a theory that explains something, anything, God knows that Darwin didn’t.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
